Class 2dt 

Book. . 

Copyright If 

COPYRIGHT DEPOSIT. 



THE MORALITY OF MODERN 
SOCIALISM 



BY THE SAME AUTHOR 

THE CHARACTERISTICS AND THE RE- 
LIGION OF MODERN SOCIALISM. 
12mo, cloth, net, $1.50 

" We are here shown in detail and convincingly 
what is meant by the full consequences of the Social- 
ist philosophy." — The Messenger. 



DATA OF MODERN ETHICS EXAMINED. 

12mo, cloth, net, $2.00 

" The style is clear and simple, and the arrange- 
ment of the book so logical that the reader is led from 
page to page." — The Pilot. 



The Morality o 
Modern Socialism 



By 

Rev. JOHN J. MING, S.J. 

Author of " The Characteristics and the Religion of Modern Socialism," 
" Data of Modern Ethics Examined," etc. 



New York Cincinnati Chicago 

BENZIGER BROTHERS 

PRINTERS TO THE 1 PUBLISHERS OF 

HOLY APOSTOLIC SEE | BENZIGER'S MAGAZINE 



I9O9 



Ipermlssu Superiorum, 



mibll ©bstat 



Umpttmatur. 



.VAS 



R. J. MEYER, S.J., 

Prcep. Prov. Miss. 



REMY LAFORT, 

Censor Librorum. 



4* JOHN M. FARLEY, 

Archbishop of New York, 



New York, December 6, 1908. 



Copyright, 1909, by Benziger Brothers. 



PREFACE 



Important as is the attitude which socialism 
has assumed toward religion, its moral teachings 
are certainly of no less, perhaps even of greater con- 
sequence. Morality, as we understand it, bears 
both on personal and common welfare. By subject- 
ing passion to reason and directing reason to the su- 
preme good and ultimate end, it at once elevates 
man to the highest rank in the visible creation and 
ensures his perfect happiness. So, too, by estab- 
lishing the right relations among men and by en- 
joining on them the duties of justice and charity, 
it unites them into social bodies for the promotion 
of public security and prosperity. This is so true 
that wherever morality is declining, the degrada- 
tion of manhood, the decay of society, the destruc- 
tion of peace and order must follow as unavoidable 
consequences. 

Socialism, which nowadays is spreading in ever 
widening circles, is inseparably connected with ethics 
and morality. As a social movement it aims at 
the overthrow of our present civilization and the 
reconstruction of the social order on a new, non- 
religious basis. As a philosophical theory it like- 
wise adopts a new conception of the world, es- 
sentially materialistic, embraces new views of hu- 
man life, cutting it off from existence beyond the 

5 



6 



Preface 



grave, proposes new laws for individual and so- 
cial development, which it regards as not distinct 
from cosmic evolution, and so sets up a new code of 
ethical precepts. All this it begins to explain in the 
press and in frequent addresses to the masses at 
large and especially to the working population. 

The general public can not be indifferent to this 
most recent phase of morality. For the sake of so- 
ciety, its welfare and existence, it is bound to in- 
quire into the laws and tenets of socialist ethics and 
to weigh their bearings on State, Family, and 
Church. 

The following chapters have been written with 
the purpose of throwing some light on so vitally 
important a subject. To achieve this end critically 
and systematically, the authentic sources of socialist 
ethics have been searched into, the most renowned 
and reliable of its expounders consulted, and their 
views reproduced in their own words, while the 
first and fundamental principles, the basis of all 
conclusions, have been accurately set forth and care- 
fully elucidated. The materialistic theory underly- 
ing socialist philosophy, however, does not require 
investigation, as this has been made at full length 
in another work lately edited.* 

In conclusion the author wishes to acknowledge 
his special indebtedness to the Rev. John MacHale 
of Cleveland. The Author. 

*The Characteristics and the Religion of Modern Socialism. 
By the Author. New York, Benziger Bros., 1908. 



CONTENTS 

PAGE 

Preface ...... 5 

Introduction . . . . .11 

PART I 
THE BASIS OF MORALITY 

CHAPTER I 

The Theistic Basis of Morality . . 15 



CHAPTER II 

The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 21 



CHAPTER III 

The Ultimate End of Man 

Section I. — In the Lower Stages of Evolution 36 
Section II. — In Final Society . . 66 



CHAPTER IV 

The Moral Law ..... 83 



CHAPTER V 

The Moral Motive . . . .100 

7 



8 Contents 
PART II 

THE ETHICS OF INDIVIDUAL LIFE 

CHAPTER I 

PAGE 

Individual Conduct Outside the Sphere of Morality i i 4 
CHAPTER II 

Evils from which Individual Life Must be Free 120 
CHAPTER III 

Normal Development of Individual Life . .124 
CHAPTER IV 

Individual Rights . , . .135 



PART III 
ETHICS OF THE FAMILY 

CHAPTER I 

The Family before the Time of Civilization 

Section I. — The Idea of Society . . 146 

Section II. — The Idea of the Family . 152 

Section III. — The Primitive Forms of the Family 1 5 7 

CHAPTER II 

The Monogamous Family under Civilization 

Section I. — The Origin of Monogamy . 174 

Section II. — Modern Monogamy . .176 



Contents 



9 



CHAPTER III 

The Family under Socialism page 
Section I. — The Abolition of the Present Form 

of the Family . . . .197 

Section II. — Marriage under Socialism . 200 

Section III. — Free-Love Actually in Practice 216 
Section IV. — Parental Society . .242 



PART IV 
ETHICS OF THE STATE 

CHAPTER I 

Idea of the State . , . .259 

CHAPTER II 

The Primitive Form of Civil Society . . 263 

CHAPTER III 

The Origin and Nature of the State . .275 
CHAPTER IV 

The Abolition of the State . . . 296 

•CHAPTER V 

Socialist Attitude toward the State . .301 



CHAPTER VI 

The Co-operative Commonwealth . .328 



io Contents 

CONCLUSION 
I 

The Method Employed 

II 

The Conclusions Arrived at 

III 

The Final Outcome of Socialism . 



Index 



INTRODUCTION 



Modern socialism, both as a philosophical sys- 
tem and as a social movement, not only pro- 
nouncedly disavows but also combats religion. Its 
very founders, Karl Marx and Frederick Engels, 
disdainfully look upon religious belief as an ab- 
surd popular superstition, nay, as a fantastic deg- 
radation of human nature. Subsequent leaders and 
authors go farther still in their hostility to relig- 
ion. To their mind it is not merely an erroneous 
superstition, but a bane to human society, an in- 
strument of oppression in the hands of the ruling 
class, the extinction of social interest in the hearts 
of the oppressed. So pronounced is their opposi- 
tion to it, that they anxiously look forward to its 
extermination, in part by the spreading of atheis- 
tical teachings, in part by the abolition of the ab- 
normal economic conditions which, in their opin- 
ion, gave it existence. The religious attitude of 
socialism, therefore, is utterly destructive. 

Is such also its attitude toward morality? It 
might scarcely seem so. In whatever sense we 
take it, morality can not, like religion, be alto- 
gether set aside. In its primary signification it 
means not only the freedom of our actions but 
also their dependence on reason apprehended as 
their law. Now reason is necessarily a law for 

ii 



12 



Introduction 



man. When it manifests what is right or wrong, 
well-ordered or ill-ordered, its dictates should be 
inviolable. Were he at liberty to trample them 
under foot, he would cease to be a rational agent; 
he would become a monster, a living contradiction. 
He would know by nature the right order of con- 
duct, and yet not be bound to observe it, under- 
stand right and justice, and yet be permitted to 
disregard them as if ignorant of them, like the 
brute animal. If reason is not an inviolable 
law for man, it follows that what is highest in 
him must be enslaved to the lower appetite, 
whose impulses and emotions are but too often 
stronger in him than the longing of the ra- 
tional will for the future goods of a spiritual na- 
ture. By this total inversion of all right order, 
man would be lowered from his high pre-eminence 
in nature even to the very level of brute creation. 

Much less could human society subsist and 
achieve its end, if its members were not subject to 
a common law proclaimed by reason, by which 
they are laid under strict obligation to be truthful 
in their speech, to observe justice and charity, to 
respect the life, property, and reputation of others, 
and to co-operate harmoniously with one another 
for the common good. 

A law for human conduct, dictated by right rea- 
son, is, therefore, of absolute necessity. Of its 
existence every individual man is directly conscious 
as soon as he has acquired sufficient mental devel- 



Introduction 



13 



opment to act with full deliberation. Its reflex 
and reasoned knowledge, too, is so general, that 
from Grecian antiquity down to our own day it 
forms an integral part of every philosophical sys- 
tem. For, the inquiry into the ultimate causes of 
all things would be considered incomplete, did it 
not descend to the law itself, upon which the order 
of human life, both individual and social, is ulti- 
mately based. 

Hence conduct is never morally indifferent, nor 
is man, as long as he is free and has the power 
of deliberation. For free or human acts, which 
make up conduct, are either conformable to the 
law of reason or not; if conformable, they are 
necessarily good and worthy of praise and reward: 
if not, they must be morally bad and deserving of 
blame and punishment. And so man himself is 
virtuous or wicked, of good or bad moral char- 
acter, according as he complies or not with the 
law of conduct dictated by reason. 

Morality, therefore, in whatever sense it be taken, 
whether we consider it as conscious dependence on 
reason as a law, or as the knowledge of the law of 
conduct, direct or reflex, or as conformity of ac- 
tion with law, can not disappear among men, 
neither by the change of time and circumstances, 
nor by the advance of philosophy and the progress 
of human culture. 

Socialist philosophers, too, acknowledge a law 
to which human conduct is subject, a moral law. 



14 



Introduction 



What they object to, is, as they aver, the interpre- 
tation put on it during the capitalistic ages. Nor 
do they in any way, as they assure us, intend to 
relax morals. On the contrary, they promise to 
purify and elevate them, both by teaching a truer 
law of conduct and by promoting conformity with 
it more effectively than has ever been done in the 
course of history. Hence they do not hesitate to 
claim that socialism is the consummation of moral- 
ity corresponding to the last stage of human evolu- 
tion. 

But here the question presents itself: Is social- 
ism, after it has utterly destroyed religion, able 
to construct a new morality? Is a right and ele- 
vated order of human conduct still possible, when 
man's ultimate end is no longer thought to con- 
sist in his union with the Supreme Good, but is 
placed in earthly happiness based on economic con- 
ditions? Can law retain any binding force when 
it ceases to emanate from the Supreme Ruler, the 
source of all authority; and can it still uphold vir- 
tue in individual life, peace and harmony in so- 
ciety, in State and family, when it is no more than 
an animal instinct evolving with organic nature? 

These are the questions we are to solve in the 
following chapters. 



PART I 



The Basis of Morality 



CHAPTER I 

THE THEISTIC BASIS OF MORALITY 

To construct a system of morality, a basis is 
first of all required on which all its tenets may rise 
with logical consistency as one solid superstructure. 
Such a basis is the conception of moral goodness, 
man's ultimate end, the moral law and its sanc- 
tion. Without an idea of moral goodness we could 
not take the first step in building up an ethical 
system. Furthermore, as the goodness of the 
human action consists in its relation to man's ulti- 
mate end, the knowledge of the latter is indis- 
pensably necessary for the complete conception of 
the former. This end must, therefore, be clearly 
defined and thoroughly comprehended. But that 
we may know what actions are rightly conformed 
to the ultimate end, we need a norm which can 
guide us in our judgments; and that we may act 
accordingly, we require an obligation which lays 
our will under the necessity of doing what we know 
to be right and of abstaining from what we know 
to be wrong. The norm of right and wrong, at- 

15 



i6 



The Basis of Morality 



tended by the obligation which binds our will, con- 
stitutes the moral law. Again, to restrict our 
freedom and efficiently sustain the right order, law 
needs a sanction consisting in a just retribution for 
its observance or violation. 

On this basis all moral systems have been built, 
by the philosophers of ancient Greece and Rome 
as well as by modern thinkers, by Christian theo- 
logians and by pagan moralists. But though gen- 
erally admitted, these basic principles have found 
diverse interpretations which make it possible to 
construct on them different and even opposite ethi- 
cal theories. For our purpose it is necessary briefly 
to set forth here the interpretation given them by 
theistic philosophers. For it is only by comparison 
with the Christian teaching that socialist ethics 
can be thoroughly understood and correctly valued. 

Theistic philosophy acknowledges the existence 
of a personal God who, self-existent and infinitely 
perfect in Himself, is the Supreme Cause of all 
that exists beside Himself, the Creator and Ruler 
of the universe. Hence it regards Him as the 
Supreme Good and the ultimate end of all creation. 
To glorify Him by the acknowledgment of His 
infinite perfection and the love of His infinite good- 
ness is in particular the ultimate destiny of all 
rational creatures. In proportion as they pursue 
and achieve this end they will attain in God their 
own perfection also, and their ultimate bliss and 
happiness. Since God is man's ultimate end, the 



The Theistic Basis of Morality 



I? 



moral goodness of human actions ultimately con- 
sists in their direction and subordination to Him. 

Theistic philosophy, furthermore, teaches the 
spirituality and immortality of the soul and conse- 
quently the freedom of the will. Accordingly, it 
regards human conduct, not as necessary after the 
manner of organic activity, but as free and self- 
determined, and, therefore, as imputable to man 
with all its moral attributes, both its goodness or 
its badness. 

Man, possessed of freedom, needs a law which 
constrains his will to do good and to abstain from 
evil, yet so as not to destroy his freedom; a law, 
therefore, of a peculiar kind, not found in any 
other realm of nature; a law, not consisting in 
force or physical necessity 7 , but in moral obliga- 
tion. This is the moral law. 

God Himself enacted the moral law and deeply 
implanted it in human nature itself, when He cre- 
ated man. As such the moral law consists in the 
self-evident principles of practical reason and the 
legitimate conclusions drawn from them, because 
in their light we not only discern what is right and 
wrong, but also know what we are bound to do 
or to avoid. These moral principles, while neces- 
sarily manifest to us, are also necessarily true in 
themselves. For they are based on the essential 
relations that exist between God and rational 
creatures, between man and man as endowed with 
personal freedom and dignity, and between the 



i8 



The Basis of Morality 



lower or sensuous faculties and reason in man him- 
self. They are, therefore, a priori truths, prior to 
all experience, absolutely necessary, unchangeable, 
universal, and identically the same among all na- 
tions and in all times. The obligation inherent in 
this moral law descends from God's infinite, su- 
preme authority. For, as the order of conduct 
contained in the principles of practical reason must 
be conceived as essentially good and absolutely 
necessary, He, because of His essential holiness, 
can not but enjoin on rational creation its strict ob- 
servance, forbid its transgression and give to 
such command and prohibition a weight which 
lays free man under a strict necessity of obedience. 
Furthermore, on account of His infinite holiness 
and justice, He can not but effectively uphold and 
enforce the moral law He enacted in creating man. 
He does so by just retribution, that is, by just re- 
wards for its observance and by just punishments 
for its transgression. The reward consists in the at- 
tainment, the punishment, in the loss of the ultimate 
end or supreme good to which the moral law di- 
rects human conduct. Retribution, therefore, con- 
stitutes a sanction, which effectively upholds the 
order established by the moral law, both by aveng- 
ing it when violated, and by affording to the free 
will of man a powerful motive for its faithful ob- 
servance. 

The moral law, as defined by theistic philoso- 
phy, establishes the most perfect order in creation. 



The Theistic Basis of Morality 19 

It subordinates the lower faculties of man to rea- 
son, and harmoniously regulates all his actions; it 
marks out the right relations between man and 
man, and, while it guarantees freedom to each in- 
dividually, unites all into one large family or so- 
ciety; and finally it refers each and all, singly and 
conjointly, to God as their ultimate and supreme 
good, securing to them in everlasting union with 
Him perfect bliss and happiness. 

Christianity still further elevates the morals 
taught by unaided reason. It affords us a fuller 
and more certain knowledge of God, leads us to a 
closer union with Him, by the love of intimate 
friendship, binds us by a holier law, enforced by 
a more effective sanction, enjoins on us purer mo- 
tives of action, greater sacrifices and more com- 
plete self-renunciation, ministers to us ampler 
means for subduing our passions to reason and 
thus for acquiring virtue, unites mankind more 
closely by the oneness of faith and the universality 
of one Church, which embraces not only all in- 
dividual men but also all nations. 

Unquestionably this is a broad and deep basis 
of morality. Still socialist philosophy attempts to 
overthrow it thoroughly. It denies God, the Su- 
preme Being and Supreme Good, the Creator and 
Ruler of the universe, and the Lawgiver for man- 
kind; it denies the spirituality and immortality of 
the soul, the possibility of attaining happiness in 
another than this earthly existence, retribution af- 



20 



The Bash of Morality 



ter death, the freedom of the will, the necessary 
and unchangeable principles constituting the moral 
law implanted in man's rational nature. After 
such a radical denial of all theistic positions, there 
is not a trace left of the old Christian basis of 
morality. Of what kind, then, is the new basis 
which is to be substituted for the old so utterly 
demolished ?. 



CHAPTER II 



THE SOCIALIST CONCEPTION OF MORAL GOODNESS 

Socialist philosophers, when about to build up 
a new theory of morality, begin by setting forth a 
new conception of moral goodness and badness. 
According to the theistic view the morally good 
is a universal and unchangeable concept. For the 
moral goodness of human acts consists in their 
right direction to God, the ultimate end of man, 
and the norm by which this direction is discerned 
are the principles of practical reason. But God 
is eternal and unchangeable; and such, too, are ra- 
tional principles. They are necessary, universal, 
the same at all times, in all countries, and among 
all nations, because they are not based on experi- 
ence, but on the unalterable nature of things. 

Socialist philosophy, on the contrary, being a 
system of evolutionary materialism, does not know 
of anything that is not subject to continual 
changes; it knows, in particular, of no unchange- 
able end set for man, and of no unchangeable 
moral laws and principles. According to the ma- 
terialistic conception of history, morality, like re- 
ligion, is ultimately the outcome of the economic 
conditions under which men live and pursue their 
temporal well-being. But these conditions change 
in the course of time so as never to remain the 



21 



22 



The Basis of Morality 



same in any two periods of history; consequently 
morality, also, is subject to ever-succeeding 
changes. Every particular period in history has its 
own moral code, which is expressed in the customs, 
social institutions, and public opinion that pre- 
vail in it; for these mirror the ethical views and 
convictions forced on the people by the peculiar 
economic conditions under which they live. Hence 
one and the self-same action may be good in one 
age, but may become bad in the succeeding one; 
and what was wrong in the past may be right in the 
future, the conception of moral goodness changing 
with the phenomena in the economic world. 

Socialist writers set forth these views in the most 
explicit terms. Concerning the changeableness of 
the moral code Bebel says : 

u As each social stage of human development has 
its own conditions of production, so likewise has 
each its code of morals, which is but the reflection 
of the social condition. That is moral which is 
usage; and that in turn is usage which corresponds 
with the innermost being, i.e., the needs of a given 
period."* 

He advances this variability of the moral code 
as a reason why we should not condemn the pro- 
miscuity of sexes among the savages as immoral. 

Herron speaks in similar terms of the changes 
which the standard of morality undergoes. 

*Woman under Socialism. Translated by Daniel de Leon. 
New York 1904. p. 16. 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 23 

"Standards of moral value which served very 
well in the past, during the centuries when society 
was slowly emerging from slavery, are valueless 
and vicious now. Moralities of yesterday are im- 
moral to-day and destructive of the liberty and in- 
tegrity of the soul. Some of the sternest virtues of 
the past are to-day prostituting and disintegrating 
human life. We forget that there is no such thing 
as a fixed ethic, but that human society must con- 
stantly enlarge its experience and thought of the 
good, constantly transvalue its spiritual values, 
constantly widen the sphere of individual choice. 
We see the economic crisis of society, but we do 
not so clearly see its nearing religious and ethical 
crisis — a crisis which will take the word of cus- 
tom for nothing, but will examine clean to the roots 
every received notion of right and wrong."* 
May Wood Simons writes in the same strain : 
"All such systems of morals, as pointed out by 
Spencer, Loria, and others, are changing both in 
time and place. There has never yet been a per- 
manent or a universal code of ethics. Like every 
other social institution, they have been a product 
of the changes in material surroundings, geo- 
graphical locations, and different methods of 
gaining a livelihood that have marked different 
ages and peoples. That any system of ethics pre- 
vailed at a certain period argued that it was pro- 
duced by an underlying economic development 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Jan. 1901. p. 434. 



24 



The Bash of Morality 



which at that time was making for human advance. 
In the earlier stages of barbarism, community of 
goods was in general accordance with social prog- 
ress and ordinarily prevailed. Gradually the in- 
stitution of private property displaced this, and 
with it came a code of ethics that was suitable in 
every way to further and support the rights of in- 
dividual owners of property. The societies first 
making this change were better able to compete, 
that is, more fitted to survive, in the new eco- 
nomic environment, than those retaining the com- 
munal organization belonging to an earlier en- 
vironment. 

"Further, as has been frequently pointed out, 
the practice of killing those captured in battle was 
regarded as right at a time, when tribes which con- 
quered, if they were to retain their conquests, had 
no other way of disposing of their enemies. But as 
soon as these nomads settled to agricultural pur- 
suits they found it profitable to utilize their pris- 
oners for cultivating the land, and an ethical sys- 
tem arose under which slaver} 7 was 'right' In 
States where the slave passed directly into a wage- 
earner, the institution of slavery was viewed as 
'wrong' by public opinion only when modern in- 
dustry found it more profitable to hire men and 
women by the day and leave them to shift for 
themselves at times when a profit could not be 
made off their labor, than to house and clothe the 
slave through the year. Again, as shown by 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 25 

Wundt, the Reformation, which was an outgrowth 
of the great economic transformation of the time, 
found the ethics of Christianity of the day unable 
to meet the needs of the new conditions, and a fun- 
damental change took place."* 

On account of the continual changes of the moral 
code, James Oneal justifies private ownership of 
land, slavery, and murder as they were in use in 
former ages. He says : 

"There can be no eternal ethical or moral code 
to whose court can be brought every institution of 
the past and present. Such a code would be com- 
pelled to outlaw some and acquit others, when the 
fact is that every institution, custom, and belief, 
has been in the line of advance in some stage of 
history. To pass judgment on slavery or land 
ownership of centuries ago, because it does not 
harmonize with moral standards based on twenti- 
eth century culture and philosophy, is to ignore the 
law of adaptation to environment, which calls into 
existence serviceable institutions as well as destroys 
them when they become outgrown. 

"It may be said that in the case of land owner- 
ship and slavery, which we admit as based on 
force, it is evident they can at least be universally 
condemned because of the means employed. The 
answer is that this blood and conquest was merely 
the rude form in which the struggle for supremacy, 
still being waged, was carried on, and was as much 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Dec. 1900. p. 337. 



26 



The Basis of Morality 



a necessary factor in the evolution from the no- 
madic to the industrial type as modern battleships 
are to the development of world capitalism pre- 
paratory to its conquest by the politically organ- 
ized working class. 

"The material interests of the ruling class of 
every age are reflected in the moral code of their 
time, and this code will be changed, modified, and 
adapted to suit the changing character of produc- 
tion, even though the change be so rapid as to re- 
verse in a single year the code of the previous 
year."* 

Robert Rives La Monte in his latest work sets 
forth similar views. To quote his own words: 

"The ruling ideas of every age have ever been 
the ideas of its ruling class." This applies to ideas 
of right and wrong — of what is commonly known 
as morality — as fully as to the ideas of any other 
kind. 

"Conduct that has tended to perpetuate the power 
of the economically dominant class — since the in- 
crease of wealth has divided society into classes — 
has ever been accounted moral conduct; conduct 
that has tended to weaken or subvert the power 
of the ruling class has always been branded as im- 
moral. There you have the key of the varying 
codes of ethics the world has seen. For it must 
never be forgotten that ideas of right and wrong 
are not absolute, but relative, not fixed, but fluid, 

*The Worker. Dec. 2, 1905. 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 27 

changing with the changes in our modes of pro- 
ducing food, clothes, and shelter. Morality varies 
not only with time but with social attitude." 

"Ethics simply register the decrees by which the 
ruling class stamps with approval or brands with 
censure human conduct solely with reference to 
the effect of that conduct upon the welfare of that 
class." 

"Morality is, in its very essence, a class institu- 
tion — a set of rules of conduct enforced or incul- 
cated for the benefit of a class."* 

According to J. Dietzgen there is no intrinsic or 
essential distinction between good and bad; they 
differ only relatively and in degree. 

"There is no fixed gulf in science between 
worthy and unworthy objects, and none in scientific 
ethics between good and evil. All things are use- 
ful and suitable; clean and unclean, love and hate, 
enjoyment and renunciation — all is relative, more 
or less, according to time and conditions."! 

"Different stages of human evolution have dif- 
ferent moral laws and even so contradictory ones 
that virtue is in one place what is vice in an- 
other.":): 

The same relativity is asserted by Kautsky : 
"What is specifically human in morality, the 

*Socialism: Positive and Negative. Chicago 1907. pp. 59-63. 

tSome of the Philosophical Essays. Translated by M. Beer 
and Th. Rothstein. Chicago 1906. p. 128. 

t Ibid. p. 165. See also p. 170. 



28 



The Basis of Morality 



moral codes, is subject to continual change. This 
does not prove, all the same, that a class or a so- 
cial group can not be immoral; it proves simply 
that so far at least as the moral standards are con- 
cerned, there is just as little an absolute morality 
as an absolute immorality. Even the immorality 
is in this respect a relative idea. Only the lack of 
more social impulses and virtues, which man has 
inherited from the social animals, is to be regarded 
as absolute immorality. 

"If we look, on the other hand, on immorality 
as an offense against the laws of morality, then it 
implies no longer the divergence from a distinct 
standard, holding for all times and places, but the 
contradiction of the moral practice to its own 
moral principles; it implies the transgression 
against moral laws which people themselves rec- 
ognize and put forward as necessary. It is thus 
nonsense to declare particular moral principles of 
any people or class, which are recognized as such, 
to be immoral simply because they contradict our 
moral code. Immorality can never be more than a 
deviation from our own moral code, never from a 
strange one."* 

As hinted at in the preceding quotations, socialist 
writers distinguish in the past changes of the moral 
code four different stages, which correspond to the 
primitive, slave, feudal, and capitalistic society. 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History. Trans- 
lated by John B. Askew. Chicago 1907. pp. 192, 193. 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 29 

The last stage, however, in which morality will 
attain its ultimate perfection, has not yet been 
reached, but is to come in final society, the so- 
cialist commonwealth. Bebel characterizes the 
moral code of these different stages briefly in the 
following words: 

"Just as with religion, moral conceptions are 
also born of existing social conditions at given 
times. Cannibals regard the eating of human be- 
ings as highly moral; Greeks and Romans re- 
garded slavery as moral; the feudal lord of the 
Middle Ages regarded serfdom as moral; and to- 
day the modern capitalist considers highly moral 
the institution of wage-slavery, the flaying of 
women with night work and the demoralization of 
children by factory labor. Here we have four dif- 
ferent moral social stages, and as many different 
conceptions of morality, and yet in none does the 
highest moral sense prevail. Undoubtedly the 
highest moral stage is that in which men stand to 
one another free and equal; that in which the prin- 
ciple : 'what you do not wish to be done unto you, 
do not unto others' is observed inviolate through- 
out the relations of man to man. In the Middle 
Ages, the genealogical tree was the standard; to- 
day it is property; in future society, the standard 
of man is man. And the future is Socialism in 
practice."* 

Changeableness is not the only feature, however, 

*Woman. p. 322. See also Int. Soc. Rev. Dec. 1900. p. 337. 



3° 



The Basis of Morality 



by which the socialist conception of moral good- 
ness differs from the Christian. There are still other 
and even wider differences. The human act, 
which is morally good or bad, according to the- 
istic philosophy, is free and peculiar to man as a 
rational agent. But against such an admission evo- 
lutionary materialism, as taught by socialists, raises 
a solemn protest. The materialist absolutely de- 
nies free will, and the evolutionist regards man with 
all his higher faculties, rational and moral, as a 
descendant of brute ancestors. 

True, sometimes materialists speak of freedom. 
But when they proceed to a fuller explanation, it 
becomes evident at once that they do not mean by 
it self-determination or the capability of acting or 
not acting, of putting forth or withholding an ac- 
tion when under given circumstances all the pre- 
requisites for it are present. Karl Kautsky, for in- 
stance, quite positively asserts the necessity of free- 
dom. 

"Of it (the future) I have not the smallest ex- 
perience. Apparently free, it lies before me, as 
the world which I do not explore as one knowing 
it, but in which I have to assert myself as an active 
agent. Certainly I can extend the experience of the 
past into the future, certainly I can conclude that 
these will be even so necessarily determined as 
those; but even if I can only recognize the world 
on the assumption of necessity, yet I shall only be 
able to act on it on the assumption of a certain 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 31 

freedom. Even if compulsion is exercised over my 
action, there remains to me the choice, whether I 
shall yield to it or not, there remains to me as last 
resort the possibility of withdrawing myself by a 
voluntary death. Action implies continual choice 
between various possibilities, and be it alone that 
of doing or not doing, it means accepting or re- 
jecting, it means defending or opposing. Choice, 
however, assumes in advance the possibility of 
choice just as much as the distinction between the 
acceptable and the inacceptable, the good and the 
bad. The moral judgment, which is an absurdity 
in the world of the past, the world of experience, 
in which there is nothing to choose, where iron 
necessity rules, is unavoidable in the world of the 
unknown future — of freedom. 

"But not simply the feeling of freedom is as- 
sumed by action, but also certain aims. If in the 
world of the past, the sequence of cause and effect 
(causality) rules, so in the world of action, of the 
future, the thought of aim (Teleology). For ac- 
tion the feeling of freedom is an indispensable 
psychological necessity, which is not to be got rid 
of by any degree of knowledge."* 

We grow rather distrustful, however, regarding 
the nature of the freedom thus asserted, when to 
the words quoted he immediately subjoins: 

"But all that is no monopoly of man but holds 
also of the animals. Even these have freedom of 
*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 59-61. 



32 



The Basis of Morality 



the will, in the sense that man has, namely as a 
subjective, inevitable feeling of freedom, which 
springs from ignorance of the future and the ne- 
cessity of exercising a direct influence on it. And 
just in the same way they have command of a cer- 
tain insight into the connection of cause and effect. 
Finally the conception of an end is not quite 
strange to them." 

In fact, notwithstanding the subjective inevi- 
table feeling of freedom respecting the future, 
man is subject to physical necessity, when he comes 
to set up the end to be pursued. Kautsky had said 
just before : 

"His (man's) whole experience lies in the past, 
all experience is past, and all the connecting links 
which past experience shows him lie with inevitable 
necessity before, or still more, behind him. In these 
there is nothing more to alter, he can do nothing 
more in regard to them than recognize their neces- 
sity. Thus is the world of experience, the world of 
knowing, and the world of necessity."* 

Now applying this axiom to the setting up of 
aims, he says : 

u The setting up of aims is not anything which 
exists outside the sphere of necessity, of cause and 
effect. Even though I set up aims for myself only 
in the future, in the sphere of apparent freedom, 
yet the act of setting up aims itself, from the very 
moment when I set up the aim, belongs to the past, 
*Ibid. p. 59. 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 33 

and can thus in its necessity be recognized as the 
result of distinct causes. That is not in any way 
altered by the fact that the attainment of the end 
is still in the future, in the sphere of uncertainty, 
thus in this sense in that of freedom. Let the at- 
tainment of the end be assumed as ever so far dis- 
tant, the setting up of the aim itself lies in the past. 
In the sphere of freedom there lie only those aims 
which are not yet set up, of which we do not know 
anything as yet. The world of conscious aims is 
thus not the world of freedom in opposition to that 
of necessity. For each of the aims which we set 
ourselves, just as for each one of the means which 
we apply to its attainment, the causes are already 
given and are under certain circumstances recog- 
nizable as those which brought about the setting 
up of these aims and determined the way in which 
that was to be achieved." 

"What is to-day the future will be to-morrow 
past; thus what to-day is felt to be free action will 
be recognized to-morrow as necessary action. The 
moral law in us, which regulates this action, ceases, 
however, with that to appear as an uncaused cause; 
it falls into the sphere of experience and can be 
recognized as the necessary effect of a cause — and 
only as such a cause are we at all able to recognize 
it, or can it become an object of Science."* 

The reader may wonder at Kautsky's reasoning. 
No doubt, if an action has once been performed 
*Ibid. pp. 61, 62, 64. 



4 



34 The Basis of Morality 

and thus become an object of experience, it follows 
with logical necessity that it exists, but it does not 
follow that it has been performed with antecedent 
physical necessity. The fact of a murder may be 
established with full certainty by the experience of 
witnesses, but hence it can not be inferred that the 
murderer acted compelled by necessity. Otherwise 
a judge would have to dismiss a criminal and ab- 
stain from pronouncing sentence on him, as soon 
as his crime has been proved as an undeniable fact. 
For he can not in justice punish a man who com- 
mitted murder under physical necessity, any more 
than he can sentence to death a lion who, driven 
by hunger, tore a traveler to pieces. 

The moral act, devoid of freedom, is said to be 
not peculiar to man, but common to man and brute. 
For, as Kautsky holds, animals are moved by moral 
impulses, are subject to moral laws and have con- 
science and feeling of duty. In saying so he is in 
full agreement with other evolutionary material- 
ists, especially with Charles Darwin and Herbert 
Spencer, who discovered subhuman morality in the 
animal kingdom. Hence in the opinion of Dietz- 
gen and Kautsky morality itself has an animal 
origin and is but a natural quality, not distinct 
from the bodily and physical,* and in the opinion 
of Ladoff a purely biological phenomenon. f 

*Kautsky. Ethics and the Materialist Conception of His- 
tory, p. 200. Dietzgen. Philosophical Essays, pp. 164, 168, 171. 
hint Soc. Rev. Chicago, June 1908. p. 740. 



The Socialist Conception of Moral Goodness 35 

Great as is the difference between theists and so- 
cialists in defining moral goodness and character- 
izing the moral act, the discrepancy between them 
with regard to the ultimate end of man is still more 
striking. 



CHAPTER III 



THE ULTIMATE END OF MAN 



Section I 

The Ultimate End in the Lower Stages of 
Evolution 

Socialist philosophy, denying both the exist- 
ence of a personal Deity and the immortality of the 
soul, can not possibly propose God as the ultimate 
end of man, so as to regard His glorification 
our final destiny and perpetual union with Him 
our consummate happiness. To the socialist hu- 
man society is the supreme being. Hence he looks 
on social welfare as the ultimate object which every 
individual man must pursue, and considers human 
actions as morally good or bad according as they 
further or hinder the common or public well-being. 
Accordingly, socialist ethics is a moral science, 
whose sole object is to determine the duties which 
are incumbent on man toward society; a utilitarian 
system which regulates conduct and values its 
moral worth exclusively by its social utility. So, in 
fact, ethics is defined by Ladoff : 

"Morality or ethics is a system of conduct of the 
members of a social group toward each other. 

36 



The Ultimate End of Man 37 



Conduct approved and sanctioned by the group is 
considered as correct and praiseworthy. Vice versa 
— behaviour condemned by public opinion is 
looked upon as immoral and blameworthy. The 
conduct of the members of a social group is reg- 
ulated and controlled by the group in its collective 
interests. Acts injurious to the interests of the 
group are condemned as immoral, and vice versa, 
acts useful to the interest of the group are praised 
as moral."* 

Morris Hillquit concurs with his view when he 
writes : 

''Morality, which was defined by Professor 
Ward as conducive to 'race safety,' and by Mr. 
Stephan as conduct conducive to the 'health of so- 
ciety,' and which in the earlier stages of social evo- 
lution stands principally for courage and loyalty 
in battle, in a more advanced society comes to a 
large extent to signify conduct favoring the eco- 
nomic efficacy and prosperity of the nation. "f 

These statements fairly express the conception 
of morality and the ethics adopted by socialist 
writers, as we shall see in the sequel. An excep- 
tion is made by A. Loria and a few others, who 
regard individual well-being harmonized with so- 
cial welfare as the end of man and the standard of 
conduct. 

*Int. Soc. Rev. Feb. 1905. p. 449; June 1908. p. 740. 
f Socialism in Theory and Practice, New York, 1909. pp. 
52, 53- 



38 



The Basis of Morality 



Socialist philosophers inquire into morality not 
only as it will prevail in future society, when it will 
reach its highest stage of perfection, but also as it 
was practised in preceding ages, when it was as yet 
deficient. For in their opinion, it was, like civiliza- 
tion in general, slowly developing in the course of 
history under the influence of economic conditions. 
As long as these were abnormal, it, too, could 
reach but a lower degree, but whenever they 
improved, it changed and rose to higher perfec- 
tion. This was required by the law of universal 
evolution. When the present economic conditions 
shall disappear and be succeeded by better ones, 
the old moral code must be abolished, because it 
will have become unfit and even an impediment to 
progress, and a new one will be introduced, which 
will further the advancement of society. 

This is well set forth by May Wood Simons, in 
an article written for the "International Socialist 
Review." Speaking of those codes of ethics actu- 
ally existing in different stages of social develop- 
ment, she says : 

"In each and every stage of society the test of 
the fitness of any system of ethics lies in the proof 
that it does or does not make for the progress 
of the race. By progress here is meant an increas- 
ing control by man over the forces of nature; a 
greater ability to make them serve his comfort and 
perform his tasks; in short, a growing mastery 
over his environment. This greater control is 



The Ultimate End cf Man 39 



equivalent to a higher development of the human 
race. Up to this test every system of morality has 
been obliged to come or disappear."* 

Bax has made the four stages through which the 
utilitarian morality of socialism has passed thus far 
a special subject of his studies. According to him 
primitive morality was the identification of indi- 
vidual with social interests, in so much that the 
common welfare was the only end and object had 
in view by individual man, though as yet in an un- 
conscious and rude manner. 

"We have first of all to remember that in the 
ancient world and in earlier phases of society, 
morality affirmed itself as the solidarity of the in- 
dividual with his kin, his 'gens, his tribe, his 
people.' There was then no opposing interest be- 
tween individual and community; the interest of 
the individual was absolutely identified with that 
of the race. He had not as yet drawn the distinc- 
tion between himself and the society to which he 
belonged. The Greek of the pre-Homeric age, the 
Hebrew in the period echoes of which are discern- 
ible in the Pentateuch, the Teuton as described by 
Tacitus and many later writers, did not exist for 
himself or others as an independent individuality; 
his significance consisted in the particular clan of 
which he was a member, or in the particular tribe 
or group of tribes he represented. His personal 
telos was identified with the social whole into 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Dec. 1900. p. 336. 



40 



The Basis of Morality 



which he entered. But at the same time that he 
had no interest independent of his race, he had 
likewise no duties outside that race. Society, and 
therefore Ethics, existed on the basis of Kinship 
and of kinship alone. Within the charmed circle 
all was sacred, without it all was profane. The 
primitive society of kinship, then, was a self-con- 
centered organism, apart from which the constitu- 
ent units, the individuals composing it, had no sig- 
nificance."* 

"At first the 'Society of Kinship' is the end of 
all duty; the individual implicitly conscious of his 
own inadequacy is sunk in the society, knows and 
cares for no existence outside of society. This is 
from the Socialist point of view the highest moral- 
ity which up to now has been generally prevalent in 
the world."f 

In slave-society, which subsequently to the in- 
troduction of private property was established in 
Greece and Rome, morality deteriorated. As clans 
and tribes were dissolved, society was converted 
into the political State, which consisted of the pos- 
sessing and ruling classes intent upon their particu- 
lar interest. The other classes remained unpro- 
tected or were oppressed. While thus society and 
man, social and private interests were separated, 
and life was looked upon with dissatisfaction, the 
individual began to pursue his own happiness, ma- 

*Ethics of Socialism. London 1902. pp. 9, 10. 
tlbid. p. 26. 



The Ultimate End of Man 41 



terial or spiritual, natural or supernatural, as his 
ultimate end. 

"With the dissolution of early tribal society 
with its kinship basis," says Bax, "with the rise of 
political society with its property basis, and the 
leisure thence resulting, the old ethical object of 
the individual gradually lost its power. He now 
became explicitly conscious of his own inadequacy 
to himself; but tried to resolve his consciousness 
and to abolish the dissatisfaction of which it was 
the cause by ( 1 ) resolutely turning his attention in 
upon himself, and with conscious purpose definitely 
placing self-interest before him as his end (Cynics, 
Cyrenaics, earlier Stoics and Epicureans) ; and (2) 
by holding up before himself a professedly extra- 
individual, but also extra-natural ideal, as his end 
(later Stoics, Neo-Platonists, Gnostics, and Chris- 
tians). Man as an individual thus no longer rec- 
ognised his end in the society; but rather in him- 
self, either as natural individual, or as spiritual in- 
dividual. Hence arose the two systems of individ- 
ualist ethic which though they have passed through 
many variations of aspect, have remained substan- 
tially the same from that day to this. On the one 
hand, amongst the well-to-do you have, in the 
shape as it were of a light froth, the Epicurean- 
Benthamite Ethic of 'enlightened self-interest,' on 
the other the Stoic-Christian Ethic of personal 
'holiness' and 'sin.' This, though it reaches its 
classical historic expression in Christianity, is fun- 



42 



The Basis of Morality 



damentally the same in Neo-Platonism, Buddhism, 
Parseeism, and even Islamism."* 

Stoic-Christian morality is more fully character- 
ized by Bax in the following passage: 

"The old feeling of duty, of the ought, still sur- 
vived, but without its old object, and without its 
old basis. Metaphorically speaking, it 'wandered 
through dry places, seeking rest and finding none.' 
It was already long since man had begun to reflect, 
and through reflection to distinguish not merely 
his own personality from society and the universe 
at large, but also to distinguish his thinking self 
from his corporeal self; and the sense of the im- 
portance of these distinctions was growing on him 
year by year. It was out of the depth of this intro- 
spection, coupled with his dissatisfaction at the 
then orthodox oflicial morality which had now lost 
its meaning for him, that a solution of the enigma 
and object for his moral consciousness seemed to 
offer itself. Was not the material universe like his 
body, the outward manifestation of a soul or self? 
Nothing could be more obvious, as it seemed to 
him. Further, was not this personality enshrined 
in the body of the universe the immeasurably 
higher counterpart of the personality enshrined in 
his body? and was not this higher personality at 
once its source and its end? No less assuredly as he 
thought. He, the feeble reflection of the divinity, 
had as his chief end the fulfilment of the divine 

*Ethics of Socialism. London 1902, pp. 26, 27. See also 
pp. 10-16. 



The Ultimate End of Man 43 



will preparatory to his ultimate union with the 
divinity. Morality, duty toward his fellow man, 
might be, it is true, a part of the divine system of 
things, and conscience even a spark of the divine 
flame; yet nevertheless the only ultimate sanction 
of morality was the will of God. This chief end 
was not to be found in any relation between his in- 
dividual self and society, which was only incidental 
and by the way, but in the relation between him 
and the divinity. It was by careful searching of 
his own heart, by lengthened self-introspection that 
the divine will might be discovered. The first and 
chief end of all morality was to purify his highest 
self from the gross taint of material desires. He 
must negate and subdue his inferior part, his body, 
which was the greatest hindrance to his higher per- 
fection and of which his soul was independent, 
just as the Deity was essentially independent of the 
physical universe. The result was that the aims of 
moral action became diverted into the negation of 
bodily desire — asceticism." 

"The highest and most complete expression of 
this phase is to be found in Christianity, though it 
is also embodied, in its essential features, in all the 
great ethical religions (so-called) as well as those 
later philosophies and theosophies of the Pagan 
world which Christianity superseded."* 

The essence of Christian morality is comprised 
by Bax in these few words : 

*Ibid. pp. 11-13. 



44 



The Basis of Morality 



"At last then in the notion of a transcendent yet 
immanent God, the end of man, that is of the in- 
dividual man (the only aspect of man that was 
now considered) was found. In God this indi- 
vidual man saw the completion and perfection he 
lacked when considered as an independent being. 
Duty in the worldly sense was in the last resort 
merely a condition prescribed by God for attain- 
ing individual holiness."* 

Bax, however, does not fail to remark that the 
rise of this new individualistic morality was a 
necessary consequence of new economic condi- 
tions, f 

If we are to believe him, a rise to higher moral- 
ity took place again in feudal society. In his 
opinion, the feudal system, economically considered, 
was nothing else than primitive communistic so- 
ciety with the superadded notion of limited sov- 
ereignty conferred on the head of the community. 
As to religion, feudalism, though entirely the off- 
spring of the customs of the German tribes, was 
wedded to the Church of the decaying Roman 
Empire, the mother of Monasticism. "Yet the ac- 
ceptance of Christianity by the German peoples 
could be little more than nominal." "Much of the 
old tribal morality of the Germans, and many of 
their old modes of thoughts continued to exist 
under the sanction of the Church." "The indi- 

*Ethics of Socialism. London 1902. pp. 14, 15. 
tlbid. p. 15. 



The Ultimate End of Man 45 



vidualism and supernaturalism of the Church sub- 
sisted side by side with the semi-paganism of the 
popular creed." Hence "the mediaeval mind had 
reserved to itself the idea of two separate 
spheres, a religious and a secular. To the 'secular' 
man religion consisted in external and pagan ob- 
servances, in consideration of which the Church 
guaranteed his ultimate salvation. It was only to 
the monastic recluse, and even rarely to him, that 
religion was a personal matter."* 

Owing to this historical development morality 
was not individualistic under feudalism. 

"Duty and lealty towards the feudal superior, as 
representing the community, continued for ages to 
be the mainspring of his (the German's) life. 
Even with the monk, as a general rule, it was the 
welfare of his order which was uppermost in his 
thoughts rather than his own personal salvation, as 
Carlyle has remarked in his 'Past and Present,' 
and this notwithstanding that the genesis of mo- 
nasticism itself is traceable to a totally opposite sen- 
timent."f 

With the downfall of feudalism, as Bax tells us, 
individualism was again in the ascendency. 
Toward the end of the Middle Ages an opposition 
arose between the proletariat and the middle 
classes, the burghers and the nobles. In the six- 

*Religion of Socialism. London 1901. pp. 25, 26, 176. See 
also Ethics of Socialism, p. 16. 
tReligion of Socialism, p. 177. 



4 6 



The Basis of Morality 



teenth century this antagonism had reached a point 
of development which was incompatible with the 
continued existence of feudal society. The world- 
market was opening up, trade and commerce pros- 
pered everywhere. The middle or manufacturing 
and trading class, now become important factors in 
civilization, commenced to emancipate themselves 
from the trammels of the feudal or land-owning 
classes, and thereby to attain to individual freedom 
of action in the furthering of private interests. 
Then it was that a capitalistic middle class, free 
and independent, rose to power and became the 
leading form of society. 

In politics the new movement was character- 
ized by the consolidation of the European nation- 
alities, which was accomplished by bureaucratic 
centralization, by the extension of royal preroga- 
tive, and by the rise of modern commercial patriot- 
ism. Its great political expression is Constitution- 
alism, the real supremacy of the middle classes in 
the State.* 

Religion, as Bax goes on to say, lost its influ- 
ence and underwent a change. 

"The mediaeval church, the Kingdom of heaven 
on earth, in full sympathy with the temporal hier- 
archy, in which also everyone had his divinely ap- 
pointed place, and which restricted commerce and 
forbade usury, such was no religion for the new 
commercialism; the latter' s creed must have noth- 

*Religion of Socialism, pp. 27-30. 



The Ultimate End of Man 47 



ing to do with the business of this world." A new 
form of Christianity, therefore, had to be found to 
suit the needs of the new Europe which was being 
born. This adaptation of Christianity took two 
shapes, which, though widely different from each 
other, are but two sides of the same shield. The 
two forms were Protestantism and modern or Jesu- 
itical Catholicism.* 

"Protestantism proclaimed the doctrine of per- 
sonal salvation by faith alone i.e., the whole re- 
ligion was resolved into a purely personal matter. 
. . . In Protestantism the supremacy of indi- 
vidualism in religion, its antagonism to the old 
social religions, reaches its highest point of de- 
velopment. "f 

"Jesuitical Catholicism, while retaining all the 
mediaeval forms, was in reality more akin to Prot- 
estantism, and was but a product of the necessities 
of the Ecclesiasticism of the Renaissance." 

Both this modified Catholicism and the so-called 
Reformed religions were but adjuncts of the spirit 
of commercial society and in equal measure allies 
of the rising bureaucratic system.:}: 

Along with all these changes morality became 
again individualistic and divorced from public life. 

"Bourgeois morality is eminently personal. A 

^Growth and Outcome of Socialism. By W. Morris and 
E. B. Bax. London 1893. p. 95. 
tReligion of Socialism, p. 28. 
X Growth and Outcome of Socialism, pp. 98, 99. 



4 8 



The Basis of Morality 



man in his public acts, in all he does that concerns 
the people, may prove himself an ill-conditioned 
ruffian or an unscrupulous adventurer, careless 
though he plunge a whole nation into misery to 
serve his own purposes or ambition, . . . yet 
he may still, if he only make himself sufficiently 
prominent, expect honorable mention when living, 
and a monument when dead. All is fair, it is said, 
in love and in war. This principle is nowadays 
commonly extended to public life, and in politics 
all is fair that tends to personal advancement. The 
man who takes a serious view of social and polit- 
ical duty is an enthusiast to be laughed at."* 

Public welfare having thus far failed to be rec- 
ognized as the ultimate end, morality has, in Bax's 
opinion, up to this day reached a very low stage 
of development. 

Loria, too, finds it as yet very little advanced, 
though for another reason. He, unlike Bax, re- 
gards private well-being, harmonized with general 
welfare, as the supreme end, and egoism as the 
necessary motive of all human acts. Nevertheless, 
according to him the recognized ethical codes have 
thus far ensured the well-being of particular classes 
only and not that of men in general. Primitive 
society is to some extent an exception. For in it 
men co-operated for their real good, but under ex- 
ternal coercion. 

"In the primitive economy," says he, "where in- 

*Religion of Socialism, p. 31. 



The Ultimate End of Man 49 



dividuals are compelled by some despotic power to 
co-operate — but for the good of the labourer him- 
self, be it remembered, and not at all to the ad- 
vantage of the private capitalist — moral coercion 
is applied with a view toward forcing men to act 
in conformity with their real interests, of which 
they, indeed, are unconscious, but which, in reality, 
demand the conjunction of their forces. A code of 
ethics adapted to such conditions is developed by 
means of a series of penalties, preeminently relig- 
ious in character, which are imposed upon all acts 
conformable with man's apparent egoism that tend 
toward disassociation."* 

A change for the worse followed in slave so- 
ciety. 

"The labourer is reduced to the condition of a 
brute. His acquiescence in usurpation is assured 
through fear, which causes him to look upon re- 
volt as totally incapable of securing him his lib- 
erty. An imposing system of moral oppression 
succeeds in making the labourer really believe that 
he is a slave by nature, that his chains have been 
forged by a superior power, that it is vain to strive 
to break them. Thus the usurpant egoism of one 
class, while assuring it enormous advantages, en- 
genders as its natural corollary, the necessity of 
perverting the egoism of the other class, in order 
to induce it to endure in silence the injustice of 

*Economic Foundations of Society. Translated from the 
French by Lindley M. Keasbey. London 1899. pp. 28, 29. 



50 The Basis of Morality 

which it is a victim. The necessary perversion is 
accomplished by investing the ruling class with an 
appearance of terror and almost superstitious awe, 
which exert an overwhelming influence upon the 
oppressed."* 

Hence for the possessing class force constituted 
the highest law, while for the slave passive obe- 
dience was the only alternative. Religion exer- 
cised, however, a mitigating influence on the pro- 
prietors. It tempered and facilitated the relations 
among them. So also did ethics. It counseled 
kindness to one another, while it allowed the per- 
petration of flagrant outrages upon the enslaved 
laborers, and even proclaimed the abjection of 
the latter to be in conformity with nature. 

"In slave society the dominion of the morality 
of fear thus operated very differently upon the 
proprietary classes and the labourer. By threaten- 
ing free citizens with the wrath of gods and men 
as a result of their excesses or their faults, this 
ethical system succeeded in instilling a spirit of 
kindness and equity into the reciprocal relations of 
proprietors, and, at the same time, prevented them 
from exercising such cruelties toward slaves as 
might have provoked them to revolt. In other 
words, it imposed actions on proprietors which 
were really in harmony with their egoism, al- 
though they themselves were unaware of the fact. 

*Economic Foundations of Society. Translated from the 
French by Lindley M. Keasbey. London 1899. pp. 31, 32. 



The Ultimate End of Man 51 



On the other hand, it held the slaves to obedience 
by giving the dominating class an awe-inspiring 
aspect, and thus succeeded in directing the actions 
of the oppressed in a manner contrary to their 
real egoism."* 

The introduction of serf economy, Loria goes 
on to say, was attended by a radical change in the 
ethical system. 

"Moral suasion is still applied to the capitalists, 
to lead them to act in opposition to their conscious 
interest, as well as upon the labouring classes, to 
force them to act contrary to their real interests; 
but the methods of such compulsion are com- 
pletely changed. Acts that are socially injurious 
are now threatened with punishment in the life to 
come, and a dread of the future is thus made to 
take the place of present fear. Such was the great 
capitalistic function of Christianity."f 

Armed with the anathema of sanction in the fu- 
ture life, Christianity addressed itself to the la- 
boring classes and dictated to them a series of acts 
in opposition to their egoism. The serf's resigna- 
tion was assured by the threat of terrible punish- 
ment in the world beyond for disobedience, and 
still more by that fecund dogma that the gates of 
heaven were open only to the poor. The unfor- 
tunates were reconciled with the system that ex- 
ploited them. 

*Ibid. pp. 33, 34. 

7 Ibid. pp. 34, 35. 



52 



The Basis of Morality 



"With its dogma of charity this new religion 
(Christianity) addressed itself no less efficaciously 
to the ruling classes and directed their acts in con- 
formity with their real interests. The self-interest 
of those classes demanded that they should look 
with care to the well-being of the labourer, in or- 
der to avoid all danger of a revolt on his part, and 
in order that production — which had practically 
been brought to a standstill through slavery — 
should receive a fresh impulse."* 

But the Christian religion went still farther. 
Besides enjoining on them the duty of almsgiving 
as the only means by which they could enter into 
the kingdom of heaven, it sought to confine the 
intercourse of the proprietors among themselves 
within definite bounds and to prevent all such ex- 
tremes of violence as might compromise the prop- 
erty system. 

"But this same religion which took such care to 
check all acts injurious to the proprietors gave free 
scope to the most unbridled usurpation, provided 
it was not of such a nature as to compromise the 
capitalistic system; it permitted cruelty to serfs, 
violence, massacres, rapine, persecution of the Jews. 

"Thus during the entire feudal period, religion 
constituted a powerful organ of moral coaction, 
imposing upon the proprietors acts that were con- 
trary to their conscious interests, and upon the 

*Economic Foundations of Society. Translated from the 
French by Lindley M. Keasbey. London 1899. pp. 35, 36. 



The Ultimate End of Man 



53 



labourers certain acts that were in opposition to 
their real interests."* 

With the appearance of the wage economy the 
influence of religion was impaired, and coercion by 
public opinion substituted in its place. 

"We must recognize," says Loria, "that the 
conduct of the labouring classes has in our day to 
be subjected to a more modern and potent method 
of discipline. This modern method of moral coer- 
cion is supplied through the influence of public 
opinion, which, by means of a series of psycholog- 
ical processes and adroitly inspired ideas, succeeds 
in rendering every act dishonorable which carries 
with it any menace to the property system and thus 
prevents its commission. Public opinion requires 
the labouring man to acquiesce in the domination 
of capital. It appeals, indeed, to his intelligence, 
but only to warp his judgment with a view of 
urging him to fulfil certain requirements which, 
though directly contrary to his own real interest, 
are nevertheless rendered attractive by the ap- 
probation of the well-born. 

"Public opinion at the same time requires the 
capitalists to restrain themselves in their policy of 
usurpation within certain bounds, in order not to 
compromise the fate of the property system. Hav- 
ing become the despotic arbiter of judgments and 
deeds, public opinion now sets the seal of its dis- 
approval upon the least reaction on the side of the 

*Ibid. pp. 37, 38. 



54 



The Basis of Morality 



labourers against the system which oppresses 
them, and yet it tolerates usurpation on the part of 
the proprietors to the injury of the labourers, and 
even it favours suspicious appropriations by one 
capitalist to the detriment of another, so long as 
such acts do not threaten the cohesion of the capi- 
talistic system."* 

Capitalistic morality is thus upheld exclusively 
by the egoism of the dominant classes; it is their 
interest that dictates the lines of conduct to be 
followed by proprietors and laborers respectively 
and enacts the necessary moral sanctions. This, of 
course, implies a twofold moral code in capitalist 
society, one allowing pleasure and license to the 
rich, and another counseling submission to the nu- 
merically stronger class of the workers. Though 
opposite to one another, still both of them are 
grounded on the egoism, real or apparent, of the 
class for which they are made. For though the 
regulations laid down for the laborers are con- 
trary to their real interest, they nevertheless, by a 
clever display of psychological force, are made to 
appear to be conducive to their welfare. Vice 
versa, though the regulations imposed on the pos- 
sessing classes are in opposition to their immediate 
interests, they in reality promote their remote and 
lasting interests. Rooted in the real interest of the 
one class and the apparent interest of the other, 

*Economic Foundations of Society. Translated from the 
French by Lindley M. Keasbey. London 1899. pp. 39, 40. 



The Ultimate End of Man 55 



this double moral code succeeds in guaranteeing 
the persistence of capitalistic society.* 

Kautsky, like Bax and Loria, characterizes all 
morality which has thus far prevailed in the civil- 
ized world as egoistic. Tracing its evolution in the 
course of history, he discovers that the following 
ethical systems were successively adopted in philo- 
sophical and theological schools. 

Ethics became a special branch of scientific 
knowledge, when after the Persian wars nature 
lost its interest for the Greek philosophers, and in- 
stead of it humanity was made the central point of 
investigation. Very soon, however, there arose 
different ethical schools. Those who, like Epi- 
curus, followed materialism looked on happiness 
consisting in natural pleasure, sensuous and intel- 
lectual, as man's supreme end. Others, on the con- 
trary, who with Plato and Plotinus adopted mono- 
theism and idealism found the real object of hap- 
piness only in God, with whom man was to be 
united in an immortal, spiritual life after death. 
Between these two extremes there were the Stoics, 
with Zeno as their head, according to whom hap- 
piness is arrived at when man, disregarding indi- 
vidual pain and pleasure, acts in accordance with 
nature, that is, in accordance with Universal Rea- 
son, which is the soul of the universe. 

"Stoicism and Platonism became elements of 
Christianity and overcame in this form Epicurean 

-Ibid. pp. 60, 68. 



The Basis of Morality 



materialism." The latter "was bound to be re- 
jected by the whole society so soon as this had so 
far degenerated that even the ruling classes suf- 
fered under the state of affairs, so that even these 
came to the opinion that no good could come out 
of the existing world, but that this only brought 
forth evil. To despise the world with the Stoics, 
or look for a Redeemer from the other side with 
the Christians, that w r as the only alternative." 

"A new element came into Christianity with the 
invasion of the barbarians, which substituted for 
the decadent society of the Roman Empire an- 
other, in which the decrepit remains of the Roman 
world were again invigorated by the youthful so- 
cial life of the Germans." But these two elements 
combined to produce a new construction. 

On the one hand the Christian Church, domi- 
nating the brute force of the barbarians as a 
spiritual power, became the bond which held the 
new State together; an effect which only contrib- 
uted to strengthen the philosophic foundation of 
Christianity and its system of ethics. 

"But on the other hand there came through this 
new situation the joy in life and a feeling of self- 
confidence into society which had failed at the 
time of the rise of Christendom. Even to the 
Christian clergy — at least in the mass — the world 
no longer appeared a vale of tears and they ac- 
quired a capacity for enjoyment — a happy Epi- 
cureanism, certainly a coarser form and one which 



The Ultimate End of Man 57 



had nothing in common with the ancient philoso- 
phy. Nevertheless the Christian priesthood was 
obliged to hold to the Christian ethic, no longer 
as the expression of their own feeling, but as a 
means of maintaining the rule over the people. 
. . . Thus the new social situation produced on 
the one hand a tendency to a materialist system of 
ethics, while on the other a series of reasons arose 
to strengthen the traditional Christian ethic. Thus 
arose the double morality, which became character- 
istic of Christianity, the formal recognition of a 
system of ethics which is only partially the expres- 
sion of our moral feeling and will, and conse- 
quently of that which controls our action. In other 
words, moral hypocrisy became a standing social 
institution, which was never so widely spread as 
under Christianity."* 

When, after the Renaissance, the study of na- 
ture after an interruption of many centuries was 
again in the ascendant, ethics took but a secon- 
dary place. It was, however, revived in the eigh- 
teenth century. But then again as in antiquity we 
find three schools of thought side by side : the tra- 
ditional Christian, the materialist, and the Kan- 
tian. "The optimism and joy of life in the rising 
Bourgeoisie, at least in their progressive elements, 
especially the intellectuals, felt itself strong 
enough to show itself openly and to throw aside 
all hypocritical masks which the ruling Christi- 
*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 18-24. 



The Bash of Morality 



anity had hitherto forced on them." With the 
bourgeoisie sided the court nobility. The new 
ethical school then founded was essentially materi- 
alistic, revolutionary, and egoistic. It was based 
on a materialistic view of the universe, combated 
Christianity and the State, priests and kings, set- 
ting up against them new ideals, and regarded 
self-interest as the motive that always determines 
man. 

Materialistic ethics of this description flour- 
ished chiefly in France. In England a compromise 
was made between materialism and Christianity, 
between the bourgeoisie and the feudal aristoc- 
racy. The English philosophers setting egoism 
and moral sense over against each other, made an 
approach to Platonism and Christianity, yet so as 
still to differ widely from the latter. 

"While according to Christianity, man is bad by 
nature, and according to the Platonic theory our 
natural impulses are the source of evil in us, so for 
the English school of the eighteenth century, the 
moral sense was opposed certainly to egoism, but 
was as much as the latter a natural impulse. Even 
the egoism appeared to them not as bad, but as a 
fully justifiable impulse which was as necessary for 
the welfare of society as sympathy with others."* 

Kant's ethics, also, is characterized by Kautsky 
as a philosophy of reconciliation. 

"The French Materialism had been a philos- 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 26-38. 



The Ultimate End of Man 59 



ophy of fight against the traditional methods of 
thought, and consequently against the institutions 
which rested on them. An irreconcilable hatred 
against Christianity made it the watchword, not 
only of the fight against the church, but of that 
against all the social and political forces which 
were bound up with it. 

"Kant's Critique of the Pure Reason equally 
drives Christianity from the Temple; but the dis- 
covery of the origin of the moral law, which is 
brought about by the Critique of the Practical 
Reason, opens for it again the door with all due 
respect. Thus through Kant, Philosophy became, 
instead of a weapon of the fight against the ex- 
isting methods of thoughts and institutions, a 
means of reconciling the antagonisms." 

"The greatest advantage thereby was drawn by 
theology. It emancipated this from the quandary, 
into which the traditional belief had fallen 
through the development of science, in that it ren- 
dered it possible to reconcile science and relig- 
ion."* 

A great and decided advance over the materi- 
alistic ethics of the eighteenth century was made 
by Charles Darwin. As Kautsky says: 

He "proved in his book on the Descent of Man, 
that the altruistic feelings formed no peculiarity of 
man, that they are also to be found in the animal 
world, and that there, as here, they spring from 
*Ibid. pp. 65-70. 



6o 



The Basis of Morality 



similar causes, which are in essence identical and 
which have called forth and developed all the 
faculties of beings endowed with the power of 
moving themselves." "Darwinism was the first to 
make an end to the division of man . . . into a 
natural and animal on the one hand and a super- 
natural heavenly, on the other." 

"Yet with that was the entire ethical problem 
not yet solved."* 

To sum up Kautsky's history of ethics in a few 
words, the prevailing moral systems since the time 
of primitive society were based either on material- 
ism or Platonic philosophy or Christian theology. 
If based on materialism, they were plainly ego- 
istic, because they placed man's ultimate end and 
happiness in natural pleasure. If based on Platon- 
ism or the Christian religion, they taught a more 
refined sort of egoism; for they regarded as man's 
supreme good the spiritual and perpetual union 
with an imaginary deity invented as the author of 
the moral law. 

The result of the historical analysis of morality 
made by Bax, Loria, and Kautsky may be briefly 
stated in the words of J. Dietzgen : 

"The ruling classes have always and every- 
where shown the disposition to consider their own 
selfish morality as the general ethical law and have 
tried to impose it upon the people.f 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 71, 103. 
t Philosophical Essays, p. 158. 



The Ultimate End of Man 61 



Let it not be objected, that the views expounded 
regarding the evolution of morality are merely a 
speculation of English and German philosophers. 
They are set forth, though in plainer language, 
by American socialists as well. Charles Kerr of- 
fers the following definition of the morally good: 

"In any state of society the commonly accepted 
idea of moral or right conduct is such conduct as 
tends to increase the happiness or well-being of the 
ruling class."* 

He illustrates this definition by an analysis of 
the moral conceptions formed in the different his- 
torical periods in accordance with prevalent eco- 
nomic conditions. 

"In Germany, 100 A.D., all members of a group 
were equal, but they had no fellow-feeling for out- 
siders. There a good man was one who risked his 
life fearlessly to bring victory for his group in war 
and spent his labor prodigally to secure comfort 
and plenty for his group in peace. The most im- 
moral conduct was cowardice and shirking." 

"In Rome at the same date the ruling class con- 
sisted of wealthy land owners, who were also 
slave-holders and cultivated their vast estates by 
slave labor. A pre-eminently good man among the 
ruling class was one who treated his slaves kindly 
so that they would not be tempted to rebel, and 
who studied and practised the military art so as 
to be of service to the state in suppressing any re- 
*Morals and Socialism. Chicago 1899. p. 10. 



62 



The Basis of Morality 



volt of slaves or repelling any invasion of bar- 
barians. Among slaves, on the other hand, a good 
man was one who was loyally obedient to his mas- 
ter without any regard to himself or his own class, 
and the worst criminal was one who stirred up his 
fellow-slaves to revolt." 

In feudal England "the ruling class was made 
up of soldier-barons who owned large tracts of land, 
cultivated by people who were free as to their per- 
sons, but were obliged to turn out and fight for 
their lord and to make over to him a certain por- 
tion of their product a year. A good baron was one 
who was not too oppressive to his people, but left 
them enough of what they earned to enable them 
to grow in numbers and to furnish him with a 
large and devoted troop of soldiers on proper oc- 
casions. A good tenant was one who worked hard 
to increase the fertility of his lord's land, and who 
went out cheerfully to fight, perhaps to be killed, 
whenever his lord thought it desirable.' 1 

In the United States in the closing year of the 
nineteenth century "the ruling class consists of 
owners of the most wonderful wealth-producing 
machinery the world has ever seen. The subject 
class consists of the people who operate his ma- 
chinery without owning it, and who receive for 
their labor a small fraction of the wealth they pro- 
duce. Here and now a good member of the ruling 
class is one who refrains from any unusually op- 
pressive acts against his workmen that would in- 



The Ultimate End of Man 



63 



cite to revolt and gives his surplus wealth freely to 
charitable societies that keep the distress caused 
by the wage system from becoming dangerously 
acute, and to educational institutions that teach the 
righteousness of capitalism." 

"A good working man in America to-day is one 
who puts the most intense energy into his work for 
his employer's benefit, refrains from the use of 
beverages that might make his labor less efficient, 
begets and cares for enough children to keep up 
the supply of future laborers, but not enough to 
make part of their maintenance fall on the tax- 
payers, and, last but not least, always votes for the 
political party of his employer. A bad working 
man is he who shows any marked interest in higher 
wages or shorter hours; a 'walking delegate' who 
aims to unite his fellows in a demand for better 
conditions is only another name for a dangerous 
criminal; while a socialist, who dares to denounce 
the capitalist system, is, in the eyes of our ruling 
class and their dupes, a vile outcast, fit only for 
the gallows or the Gatling gun."* 

E. Unterman maintains that thus far men, even 
under the influence of ethical ideals, only served 
the interests of economic or political powers. 

"These statements do not imply that vast masses 
of men have not been swayed by ideal motives. 
They do imply, however, that if men were so 

*Morality and Socialism. Chicago 1899. pp. 10-12. In the Int. 
Soc. Rev. Jan. 1908. p. 408. M. Shipley holds the same view. 



6 4 



The Basis of Morality 



swayed in great historical movements, they always 
served either a rising class or ruling class in the 
conquest or maintenance of the political or eco- 
nomic powers, and that ethical ideals were per- 
mitted to survive and spread only to the extent 
that they served such purposes. But such ideals 
were never permitted by any ruling class to quietly 
survive and spread, if that meant danger to the 
existing order. If the rulers did not succeed in sup- 
pressing them, it was because the economic evolu- 
tion undermined the foundations of the ruling 
class and thus shifted the balance of power in fa- 
vor of the rising classes, giving them a means of 
transmitting their ethics to coming generations. 
But it is a fact that the very ideals which once 
served a rising class have been and are to-day de- 
nied and violated, if they become useful in the 
struggle of a new rising class."* 

Notwithstanding its alleged egoism, the 
morality of past ages can not be condemned by so- 
cialists as vicious or depraved. It was a necessary 
outcome of the economic conditions just as well as, 
in their opinion, the untainted sanctity of the co- 
operative commonwealth will be. It was, more- 
over, necessary for the preservation of the forms of 
society which corresponded to the successive modes 
of production prevailing in different periods of 
history, and these forms themselves were necessary 
stages in the historical evolution of the human 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Aug. 1904. p. 71. 



The Ultimate End of Man 65 



race under the sway of universal laws. Socialist 
writers themselves have set forth this view. Says 
Loria : 

''Capitalistic property possesses, in fact, an his- 
torical justification, since, at a certain period of 
social evolution, it is the condition precedent to the 
association of labor, and, consequently, to civili- 
sation itself. Inasmuch, then, as capitalistic prop- 
erty can only be developed through the unre- 
strained egoism of the privileged classes, the 
morality which is thus inspired, and which both 
encourages and sanctions this stage of things, does 
more than merely cater to the sordid interests of 
the proprietary classes. In a broader sense, these 
ethics are the theoretical expression of the supreme 
interests of civilisation, of which capitalistic ego- 
ism is but the blind tool."* 

To quote from May Wood Simons : 
"We can only deal with the fact that society has 
progressed through capitalism to a position far 
ahead of the seventeenth or eighteenth century. 
. . . More fundamental still, the actual control 
exercised over material environment is infinitely 
greater than under any other stage of society ever 
existing. 

"Capitalism had a direct function to perform 
for the advance of society. ... If capitalism 
meant advance socially, then the beliefs that, aris- 
ing from it, reacted upon it and helped to maintain 
*Economic Foundations of Society, p. 47. 



66 



The Basis of Morality 



it, were a fit code of morals for the time. As 
pointed out by Leslie Stephens in his 'Science of 
Ethics,' normally the most efficient society survives, 
and we may judge from the fact of its survival that 
it developed the conditions on which its efficacy 
depended."* 

We must, therefore, conclude that human con- 
duct, directed by the moral codes of slave, feudal, 
and capitalistic society, was not immoral, however 
egoistic it may have been, but merely belonged to a 
lower stage of moral development. 



Section II 

The Ultimate End in Final Society 

After centuries of undisturbed sway, egoism is at 
last weakening, and the golden age of perfect and 
disinterested morality begins to dawn. Even now, 
although private interests are yet supreme among 
the propertied classes, social welfare is already the 
reigning motive of action in the minds of working- 
men. Just as in the bosom of decaying capitalistic 
society a new form of social life is in preparation, 
so from moral degeneracy a higher morality begins 
to develop and approaches its birth. Such at least 
is the hope of socialists. 

*Int. Soc. Rev. Dec. 1900. pp. 338, 339. See also ibid. Dec. 
1902. p. 346. 



The Ultimate End of Man 67 



"The individualist Ethic," says Bax, "is to- 
day rapidly evolving into its own contradiction, as 
its economic base is dissolving. While the man of 
the middle class can conceive of no goodness that 
is not centered in the individual — be it in his soul or 
in his pocket — the man of the working classes finds 
his individuality merged in the collective existence 
of the group of producers to which he belongs."* 

Perfect morality, however, will universally flour- 
ish only when normal economic conditions shall 
have been generally introduced by the abolition of 
private property in the means of production, when 
class rule shall have ceased to exist, and equality 
among men shall have been firmly established by 
the rise of the co-operative commonwealth. As 
J. Dietzgen says : 

"It is economic materialism only, it is but the 
communistic re-construction of society on the basis 
of material work which will bring about the true 
association of men. Only from the abolition of 
class rule, from the transformation of the selfish 
capitalistic organizations into co-operative instru- 
ments of production will issue the true brotherhood 
of man, the true morality and justice."f 

It is amusing to read the speculations by which 
socialist philosophers essay to show how in the ulti- 
mate stage of evolution social welfare and social 

*Ethics of Socialism, p. 16. See also Socialism in Theory 
and Practice, by Morris Hillquit. pp. 62, 63. 
fPhilosophical Essays, p. 160. 



68 



The Basis of Morality 



utility will be universally pursued as man's ultimate 
end and be regarded as the only standard of true 
morality. To begin with Bax: 

"At last with the dawn of a new economic era, 
the era of social production for social uses, we shall 
have also the dawn of a new Ethic, an Ethic whose 
ideal is neither personal holiness nor personal in- 
terest, but social happiness — for which the perfect 
individual will ever be subordinate to the perfect 
society. The test of personal character will here be 
not self-renunciation in the abstract, but the posses- 
sion of social qualities and the zeal for positive and 
definite social ends. This may be termed in a sense 
an absolute ethic. It is no longer naively objective 
like the Ethic of the primitive world, when the in- 
dividual was unconscious of possible interests apart 
from the community, and still less is it naively sub- 
jective, the attention of the individual being no 
longer primarily directed towards the mortification 
of self, but rather towards the broad issues of social 
life and progress. He will recognise the call of 
duty to do and to forbear only in things which di- 
rectly affect Society; all actions not having a direct 
social bearing being morally indifferent for him. 
In this new conception of duty, the individual con- 
sciously subordinates himself to the community, this 
time not to a community of kinship but of prin- 
ciple; not limited by frontier but world-embrac- 
ing."* 

*Ethics of Socialism, pp. 28, 29. 



The Ultimate End of Man 



6 9 



Previously Bax had identified morality trans- 
lated into a higher plane with religion, which, as he 
said, consisted in a sense of oneness with the social 
body, in identification of self-interest with social 
interest. Now that its nature and idea is cleared up, 
he identifies perfect morality also with politics. He 
says : 

"The separation of Ethics from Politics and of 
both from Religion, is finally abolished. In Social- 
ism, Ethics become Political, and Politics become 
Ethical; while Religion means but the higher and 
more far-reaching aspect of that ethical sense of 
obligation, duty, fraternity, which is the ultimate 
bond of every-day society."* 

J. Dietzgen expresses the end pursued and the 
moral perfection finally aimed at by social democ- 
racy in a very concise formula. 

"The principle of morality is the principle of 
human association, and the principle of human as- 
sociation is progress. Social-democracy is nothing 
else, and desires nothing else, but social and co- 
operative progress, and that is the true moral per- 
fection."f 

The French socialist Gabriel Deville speaks of 
the new morality under socialism in the following 
terms : 

"Under the regime of socialism, initiative and 
energy cannot promote personal interests alone, 

*Ibid. p. 29. 

f Philosophical Essays, p. 166. 



70 



The Basis of Morality 



while being more favorable than ever to those in- 
terests, they will necessarily be favorable to all. 
As soon as the material conditions necessary for 
the attainment of individual prosperity shall also be 
the conditions requisite for social prosperity, we 
shall see grow out of this harmony a system of 
ethics based on the newly acquired consciousness of 
social solidarity, and under this new morality* the 
actions of the individual will have not only as its 
necessary though indirect result, but also as its guid- 
ing principle, motive and goal, the social or com- 
mon interest, the greatest good of all."* 

Ladoff takes pains to establish by argumentation 
that social happiness is the end and object of per- 
fect morality, which is to prevail under socialism. 
Of the premises from which he proceeds the first is, 
that social happiness is the purpose and aim of mod- 
ern ethics, the second, that modern ethics neces- 
sarily leads to socialism. As to the aim of modern 
ethics he says : 

" 'Thou shalt do this, or abstain from that, be- 
cause the Deity has ordered it. Woe to those who 
transgress his command. But those who obey shall 
be rewarded.' Such is in a nutshell the view of the 
past on practical ethics. To the advanced thinker 
of our sceptical age, however, such motives are 
puerile. Human happiness on earth is the purpose 
and aim of modern ethics. Indeed modern ethics 

^Socialism, Revolution and Internationalism. Translated by 
R. Rives de La Monte. New York 1901. p. 50. 



The Ultimate End of Man 71 



are unthinkable without the knowledge of the laws 
governing the relations between men as members 
of society."* 

In confirmation he quotes several modern philos- 
ophers who place morality in the right social rela- 
tions, such as Herbert Spencer, who maintains that 
"from a sociological point of view ethics becomes 
nothing else than a definite account of the forms of 
conduct that are fitted to the associated state in such 
wise that the lives of each and all may be the great- 
est possible, alike in length and breadth" ; Profes- 
sor Dewey of Chicago, who affirms that morality 
is nothing but sociability; Professor Da Garmo, 
who calls the moral type of man the social type. 

As to the relation between modern ethics and so- 
cialism he says : 

"Rational ethics consists of two disciplines: the 
science or theory of conduct, and the art or practice 
of conduct. . . . The theory of ethics by the 
force of logic leads to Socialism in its broadest 
sense just as inevitably as the study of natural 
sciences leads to hygiene and prophylactic medicine. 
Still closer is the relation between the art of conduct 
and Socialism. As it is impossible for the human 
body to be and remain healthy in an anti-hygienic 
environment, practical ethics or moral health is an 
impossibility in a state of society whose institutions 
are built on an essentially immoral foundation and 
impregnated with the miasma of the animal strug- 
*The Passing of Capitalism. Terre Haute 1901. pp. 51, 52. 



7 2 



The Basis of Morality 



gle for existence. In such a society ethics of neces- 
sity must be a snare and delusion, a hypocritical 
cant and a fruitless endeavor. Socialism alone will 
make right conduct possible by creating social in- 
stitutions and conditions in the highest degree fa- 
vorable to the development of the human mind and 
character."* 

In an article written for the "International So- 
cialist Review" Ladoff says on the same subject: 

"The greatest modern world-movement — Social- 
ism — is primarily an ethical movement. Socialists 
have to extirpate the individualistic morals the 
gross individualistic materialism of our age and 
preach the noble morals, the lofty materialism of 
humanitarian aspirations. "f 

Chas. Kerr, now editor of the "International So- 
cialist Review," defines moral or right conduct in 
the lower stages of social evolution as conduct 
which tends to the happiness and well-being of the 
ruling classes. Accordingly he sets up the common 
good as the moral standard even for socialism yet 
militant. 

"In this great throbbing mass of life in which 
we must work, what is the moral thing, the right 
thing, for us to do, for us who hear the groans of 
slavery and who see the light of freedom just 
ahead? If we accept the moral standards that we 
find around us, we are riveting our own fetters. 

*The Passing of Capitalism. Terre Haute 1901. pp. 52, 53. 
flnt. Soc. Rev. Nov. 1904. p. 271. 



The Ultimate End of Man 



73 



Let us then reject them once for all. In the better 
social order that is coming, the action will be right, 
which is for the good of all. In the battle that is 
raging the right action for every worker and lover 
of justice is to do his full part, no matter at what 
temporary loss, to spread the light, to marshal the 
army, to shatter the last fortress and establish the 
reign of liberty over earth."* 

J. Spargo, formerly editor of the "Comrade," 
and of the "Worker," speaks no less plainly: 

"The very word Socialism indicates that we 
found our theories upon a belief in, and recognition 
of, social interests and obligations centered in 
those interests. Whatever advances the interests 
of society is right; whatever militates against 
those interests is wrong. We bring ethics back 
from the clouds of mythology to the world of 
men."f 

Did space allow it, we might quote from many 
other authors who conceive similarly of socialist 
morality. 

Those who profess humanitarianism as the new 
socialist religion are, of course, wedded to the same 
conceptions. P. E. Burrowes is most severe in de- 
nouncing every kind of egoism under the law of 
socialism. In a dialogue written for the "Interna- 
tional Socialist Review" he puts the question: "So 
you will have no word at all in your philosophy for 

*Morals and Socialism, p. 17. 

{Where We Stand. New York. 3rd Edition, p. 19. 



74 



The Basis of Morality 



the conduct and beautifying of the private soul?" 
and gives the answer: 

"Hardly a word, sir, save one, of advice to de- 
personalize itself speedily in will, habit and desire 
out of its phantom personality, and get into the 
truer, larger personality of society. To close, to 
step together, to live together; this will be the ego's 
science, when religion, civilization and society are 
uttered in one word, 'organization.' "* 

Herron defines self-sacrifice and identification of 
self with society as the true religion and the climax 
of morality. Nevertheless he does not go to such 
extremes as Burrowes, but knows how to reconcile 
private and social interests. He writes: 

"Most of our discussions about the antithesis be- 
tween self-sacrifice and self-interest are idle defini- 
tions. In the end it is every man's personal good to 
sacrifice himself for a common good. The high- 
est self-interest of the individual, his real joy and 
liberty, lie in pouring himself out in the service of 
his brothers; in throwing himself away for them, 
if need be. And so every man's true self-sacrifice 
lies in presenting the richest and noblest possible 
individuality to the world. True self-sacrifice and 
true self-interest are merely different names for the 
same principles of being — different names for 
self-realization, for wholeness and freedom of 
life."f 

*Int. Soc. Rev. Jan. 1902. p. 489. 
flbid. Feb. 1901. p. 504. 



The Ultimate End of Man 



75 



Herron in these words only repeats what Bebel 
has said long before in his "Woman." 

"This antagonism of interests is removed in so- 
cialist society. Each unfolds his faculties in his own 
interest, and, by so doing, simultaneously benefits 
the commonweal. To-day personal gratification is 
generally antagonistic to the commonweal ; the two 
exclude each other. In the new Order, the antago- 
nisms are removed. The gratification of the ego 
and the promotion of the commonweal, harmonize, 
they supplement each other."* 

This interpretation of perfect morality comes 
very near to Loria's theory, according to which pri- 
vate welfare, harmonized with social well-being, is 
the ultimate end pursued by men also in final so- 
ciety. For, having said that "The morality of the 
final organisation simply consists in acts and absten- 
tions from acts that make for social cohesion, "f he, 
later on, subjoins the following explanation: 

"The ultimate ethical system is based upon self- 
interest; for in an economy composed of equal and 
freely co-operating individuals, the personal inter- 
est of each precludes all acts that are injurious to 
others and encourages deeds of kindness. Indi- 
vidual utility, which constitutes the only test of 
human actions at this stage of human evolution, 
accordingly determines a line of conduct conducive 
to social happiness. For so long as each individual 

*Woman. p. 280. 

fEconomic Foundations of Society, p. 13. 



76 The Basis of Morality 



follows his own advantage only in so far as it does 
not interfere with, but rather favours that of 
others, then the well-being of the individual tends 
towards social well-being, and the free exercise of 
each man's egoism suffices of itself to assure the 
greatest sum of collective happiness."* 

For the better understanding of final morality, it 
will not be out of place to add a further explana- 
tion of what is meant in socialist philosophy by so- 
cial or collective happiness, and what by the society 
whose well-being is to be had in view as the ulti- 
mate end, and to be regarded as the standard of 
morality. 

Social happiness, as understood by socialists, is, 
of course, but temporal and earthly. For when the 
immortality of the soul is denied, when all ex- 
istence beyond this visible universe is disowned, 
and all that is conceived as spiritual and supersen- 
sible is ridiculed as unreal and imaginary, then, in- 
deed, any prosperity other than temporal must be 
renounced. 

This, in fact, is done by socialist writers, so 
plainly and so generally, that in proof thereof we 
need not quote any particular passages from their 
writings. 

But what goods and enjoyments are offered to 
man in this new terrestrial paradise? 

J. Dietzgen calls the final and happy condition of 
society the salvation of the whole civilized human- 

*Economic Foundations of Society, p. 43. 



The Ultimate End of Man 77 



ity. But this salvation, as he says, consists "in the 
wealth of to-day which arose glorious and dazzling 
in the light of science;" and the redeeming wealth 
again consists "in the secrets which we have wrung 
from nature, in the magic formulas by which we 
force her to do our wishes and to yield her bounties 
almost without any painful work on our part, in the 
constantly increasing improvement of the methods 
of production."* 

Ladoff gives us an insight into the happy condi- 
tion of the co-operative commonwealth, beyond 
which there is neither a higher stage of evolution to 
follow nor a higher degree of social well-being to 
be attained. He tells us that socialism means noth- 
ing else than the reconstruction and management of 
all social affairs according to the principles of sci- 
ence, reason, and ethics ; that it aims at the abolition 
of class distinctions and has in view all interests of 
men, moral, mental, sesthetical as well as economic; 
that its ideals are the ideals of humanity, the ideals 
of right living, of bodily health, of intellectual de- 
velopment, of a happy, harmonious, beautiful life 
on earth, of a life worth living.f 

Ladoff only outlines the picture which Bebel in 
his "Woman" has drawn in vivid colors of the 
happy life soon to be realized in the socialist com- 
monwealth. 

Happiness in this paradise, as we shall subse- 

* Philosophical Essays, p. 95. 
fThe Passing of Capitalism, p. 53. 



78 



The Basis of Morality 



quently see, will result from the complete natural de- 
velopment of the individual; from marriage whose 
bond is to be free-love ; from the democratic organi- 
zation of society, by which freedom and equal 
rights are secured to all; from normal economic 
conditions established by collective ownership in the 
means of production and distribution, by which all 
will be abundantly provided with the means of sub- 
sistence; and finally from public education and the 
promotion of arts and science, by which the high- 
est intellectual attainments will be reached. 

Happiness of this description socialists fre- 
quently profess to desire for the whole of civilized 
society, and to regard, when so desired, as the su- 
preme standard of morality. But their profession 
is subject to a qualification. The civilized society 
whose welfare is aimed at turns out to be exclusively 
the socialist society, and this again, in the present 
order of things, is constituted exclusively by the 
proletariat — the working class. Concerning this 
limitation J. Spargo gives us a very plain and 
highly interesting explanation. 

"Just as the injustice that is done to labor is the 
measure of the wrong of our present conditions, 
justice to labor must be the standard whence alone 
it can be righted. In the light of right of labor to 
the whole of its product the world must be re-cre- 
ated." 

"But, it may be argued 'class interests' and 'so- 
cial interests' are not identical : how, then, can the 



The Ultimate End of Man 79 



interest of society as a whole be gauged by the in- 
terest of the working class? That is a perfectly fair 
question which we by no means wish to evade. 
Taking the position — the only logical position, it 
seems to me — that the interests of labor are funda- 
mentally opposed to those of the exploiting class, 
and that between them, in the very nature of things, 
there can be no reconciliation, we do not attempt 
the impossible. Instead of that we say that all in- 
terests which conflict with ours, must, somehow or 
other, be eliminated. No matter how painful an 
operation that may be, it must be performed as a 
measure of self-preservation and protection. If a 
man suffers from cancer and calls a surgeon, the 
surgeon does not talk about the identity of interest 
of the cancer with that of the man's body. He 
doesn't try to find something that will help both 
at once. He well knows that such a thing would be 
ridiculous, and that if the cancer is not overcome, 
it will overcome the body. Therefore he tries to 
eliminate the cancer. Capitalism is the cancerous 
growth in the social organism that must be elimi- 
nated in the interests of the organism of a whole. 
Thus the interest of the producing class becomes 
the standard of ethical judgment. Nor is this a 
principle foreign to the science of ethics. In all 
ages it has been theoretically admitted at any rate. 
And, after all, is it not everywhere clearly apparent 
that the interest of its useful and necessary members 
is the true interest of the body? In the hive it is 



8o 



The Basis of Morality 



always the bees' interests that are considered and 
not those of the drones. With the sum total of its 
experience for its bible, and its own well-understood 
interests for its moral standard the awakened pro- 
letariat will build a new earth in which vice and 
misery shall find no place, and in which the moral 
Sahara of to-day shall be a moral Eden where the 
sweet spirit of Comradeship shall blossom forth 
like the fabled rose of unfading beauty."* 

In accordance with the view thus set forth by 
Spargo, before the co-operative commonwealth 
shall come into existence, the interests of the pro- 
letariat are to be considered as the real welfare of 
humanity and the true standard of morality. But 
the interests of the proletariat, which are identified 
with those of society, are the overthrow of capital- 
ism and the seizure of political power by revolu- 
tion. Whatever, therefore, leads to such a prole- 
tarian victory is morally good, whatever hinders it 
is morally bad. 

This is the new morality which in our age is born 
with the socialist movement. It is indeed not yet 
the highest and most perfect morality, but the one 
which is directly leading to ultimate perfection, 
the best and only one that can be practised in the 
time of transition from capitalistic oppression to 
universal freedom. 

Such is in fact the ethical position held by C. H. 
Kerr and other socialist writers. In the passage 

*Where We Stand. New York. 3rd Edition, pp. 19, 20. 



The Ultimate End of Man 81 



quoted above, he maintains that, in the battle which 
is raging, the right action for every worker and 
lover of justice is to do his full part to spread the 
light, to marshal the army, to shatter the last for- 
tress of oppression and establish the reign of liberty 
over the earth. 

P. E. Burrowes evidently entertains the same 
idea. For to his mind the good man is he, "who has 
social strength" and "is intelligently resisting, wait- 
ing and preparing to resist the obstruction of social 
democracy; and his goodness may be graded in pro- 
portion to the magnitude of the number of other 
men with whom, and in whose common interest he 
is making such resistance and preparation." In par- 
ticular "resistance to capitalism and all its attend- 
ants affords the most welcome and fruitful field for 
developing divinity in the lives of men."* 

Clearer than any other is the language of Robert 
Rives La Monte in defining the new morality, 
which the proletariat ought to practise in its pres- 
ent struggle. 

"While the revolutionary proletariat have no re- 
spect for current morality, it is none the less true 
that they have in process of growth a morality of 
their own — a morality that has already emerged 
from the embryonic stage. The proletariat are to 
be the active agents in bringing to pass the social 
revolution which is to put a period to Capitalism 
and usher in the new order. During this transition 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Dec. 1903. pp. 363, 364. 



82 



The Basis of Morality 



period and until the change is fully accomplished, 
they will be a distinct class with special class inter- 
ests of their own. As fast as they become class-con- 
scious they will recognize and praise as moral all 
conduct that tends to hasten the social revolution, 
and they will condemn as unhesitatingly as immoral 
all conduct that tends to prolong the dominance of 
the capitalist class. Already we can note manifesta- 
tions of this new proletarian morality in that sense 
of class solidarity exhibited by the workers in many 
acts of kindness and assistance of the employed to 
the unemployed and more especially in the detesta- 
tion in which the scab is held." 

"The one hope of the world to-day is in the vic- 
tory of the proletariat — aye, it is more than a hope, 
it is a certainty; but this victory can only be won 
by a proletariat permeated with the sense of soli- 
darity; and the workingman imbued with this sense 
of proletarian solidarity will be a living incarnation 
of the new morality."* 

Sufficiently acquainted as we now are with the 
end and purpose of socialist morality, we may 
safely proceed to inquire into the moral law, which 
must direct human conduct to this goal, and, by so 
doing, regulate it in its divers aspects. 

*Socialism, Positive and Negative. Chicago 1007. pp. 63, 

64, 69. 



CHAPTER IV 



THE MORAL LAW 

Socialist philosophers do not disown the ex- 
istence of a moral law, but they most emphatically 
deny its origin from any higher authority either hu- 
man or divine. From God they can not derive it, 
because they know of no divine Supreme Being. 
In this regard Kautsky quite correctly states their 
position, 

Speaking in general of moral ideals he says: 
"Only man can set himself ideals and follow 
them. Whence come these ? Are they presented to 
the human race from the beginning of his time as 
an irrevocable demand of nature or an eternal 
Reason, as commands which man does not produce 
but which confront man as a ruling force and show 
him his aims which he has ever more and more to 
strive after? That was in the main the view of 
all thinkers of the 18th century, atheists as well as 
theists, materialists and idealists. This view took 
even in the mouth of the boldest materialism the 
tendency to assume a supernatural Providence, 
which indeed had nothing more to do in nature, but 
still hovers over human society. The evolution 
idea which recognized the descent of man from the 

83 



8 4 



The Basis of Morality 



animal world made this kind of idealism absurd in 
a materialistic mouth."* 

Nor did the moral law originate in any human 
authority, civil or ecclesiastical. For civil power is, 
in the eyes of socialists, but a superior force oppress- 
ing the dispossessed classes and aiming at no other 
end than the well-being of the possessing and ruling 
class. Ecclesiastical authority is fictitious and 
usurped, promoting egoism and subservient to civil 
power. An ethical law, moreover, which lays the 
human will under a moral obligation, that is, under 
a necessity consistent with freedom, is to the social- 
ist an absurdity; for he acknowledges no free will 
in man. Law, therefore, can imply only a physical 
necessity. 

As a necessary consequence it follows that con- 
sistently with socialist teaching the moral law 
originates in the nature of the material universe. 
Nor is there in this any incongruity if, as Dietzgen 
and Kautsky maintain, morality itself has an ani- 
mal or bodily origin. 

But if the moral law originates in the material 
universe, it must be discovered by the study of na- 
ture according to the inductive method, so that 
ethics itself becomes a province of the natural 
sciences. 

This is no misrepresentation of the views held by 
the socialists in their moral science, but an exact 

* Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 103, 
104. 



The Moral Law 



85 



and comprehensive statement of their theory, borne 
out by its recognized exponents in every particular. 
Let J. Dietzgen first bear witness for its correctness. 

"The ruling classes have always and everywhere 
shown the disposition to consider their own selfish 
morality as the general ethical law and have tried to 
impose it as such on the people." 

"No divine oracle, no inner voice or pure de- 
duction from the brain shall teach us moral truth or 
any truth. That ideological way leads only to a 
hankering after a supernatural, unchanging and un- 
changeable truth. A clear scientific result can only 
be won by induction; it is always based on verifi- 
able facts; in our present case, on the established 
fact, that men need and serve each other." 

"Ideas, we again repeat this cornerstone of our 
philosophy, must be consciously based on experi- 
mental material, they must be won by induction if 
we desire to be clear about their meaning and im- 
port. And that applies to moral and political ideas 
no less than to scientific ideas."* 

"Christian irrationality, which separates the soul 
from the body, separates also the moral from the 
physical progress. It removes morality from the 
sphere of life and action into the narrow closet of 
feeling, into the secret chamber of the heart. . . . 
The undue separation of the moral from the cor- 
poreal and of mental culture from material well- 
being is a theory which appears to be especially 
^Philosophical Essays, pp. 158, 160, 163. 



86 



The Basis of Morality 



made for the benefit of the exploiters of the people. 
The bitter toil of the people is to be sweetened by 
moral sugar. . . . We social democrats, though 
distinguishing things and conditions by names and 
conceptions, are quite aware that in practice all 
things merge into one another, especially the phys- 
ical and the moral."* 

Concerning the identity of moral and physical 
law E. Untermann says very significantly: 

"Where is the starting point of your ethics, you 
teachers of conventional morality? Where is the 
place at which 'evil' enters the universe? where is 
the moral principle applicable to man which is not 
at the same time applicable to all of nature? where 
and when did sin enter the cosmic process? If there 
is anything pertinent in your ethics, it is the golden 
rule. And what is there in that rule which did not 
exist in the relations of every particle of matter 
from time immemorial? Do unto others as you 
would that others should do unto you ! But that is 
simply the so-called conscious expression of the fact 
that any atom of the universe is in the same boat 
with every other atom, and that an injury to one is 
an injury to all." 

"The social relations of man are subordinate to 
this infinite interdependence of every atom in the 
world process, and we need no other ethical code, 
but the understanding of this process." 

"What you must teach, therefore, is not ab- 

*Philosophical Essays, p. 171. 



The Moral Law 



87 



stract ethical formulas, alleged to stand for all time 
to come, no mysterious juggling with good and evil. 
What is needed, and sufficient, and alone ethical, 
because alone vital and effective, is an understand- 
ing of the irresistible process of universal evolu- 
tion, whether it be natural or social evolution."* 

So, likewise Charles Kendall Franklin in his 
"Socialization of Humanity" conceives of morality 
as a special form of the necessary universal world- 
process. 

"Through an analysis and synthesis of matter 
and energy as seen in physical, organic and social 
nature, I conceive the universe to be a process in the 
adjustment and readjustment of the two forms of 
energy constituting nature: gravitant energy con- 
stituting matter, and radiant energy constituting 
the conditions of matter; and that the universal 
process is accomplished by different methods in the 
expenditure of these two forms of energy along the 
line of least resistance. There are four forms of 
this law. First, as in physical nature . . . where 
the line of least resistance is determined by the 
blind conflict of contending energy. . . . Sec- 
ond, as in organic nature; where the line of least 
resistance is determined by mind; . . . third, as 
in morality, where the line of least resistance is de- 
termined through the moral sense, attaining a still 
greater degree of economy of energy by saving 
parts of the energy heretofore wasted by the indi- 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Aug. 1904. p. 66. 



88 



The Basis of Morality 



vidual through selfishness, turning it to the advan- 
tage of society as a whole; fourth, as in perfect so- 
ciality, where the line of least resistance is deter- 
mined by the social sense."* 

Kautsky, identifying the moral law with the so- 
cial instinct, sets forth a complete theory of its 
origin, its power, its changes, and its precepts. The 
following are his leading ideas. 

The social instinct is already found in animals 
as an effect of their struggle for existence. For 
while to some animals isolation and division are ad- 
vantageous, there are others who draw advantage 
from social life. Through division of labor their 
union becomes a body with different organs 
adapted to co-operate for their maintenance. As 
the animal so the social organism survives the 
better in the struggle for existence the more unitary 
its movements, the stronger the binding forces, the 
greater the harmony of the parts. In associated in- 
dividuals such unity of will is so much the more 
assured the stronger the impulse is from which it 
springs. 

Such impulses, while developing in the struggle 
for existence, form the conditions under which so- 
ciety exists and grows, and the virtues by which so- 
cial life is rendered possible among animals as well 
as men. 

"Among the species of animals in whom the so- 
cial bond becomes a weapon in the struggle for life, 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Nov. 1904. p. 272. 



The Moral Law 



8 9 



this encourages consequently social impulses which 
in many species and many individuals grow to an 
extraordinary strength, so that they can overcome 
the impulse of self-preservation and reproduction 
when they come in conflict with the same." 

A row of social impulses form the requisite con- 
ditions for the growth of any kind of society. Such 
must be considered, altruism, self-sacrifice of the in- 
dividual for the whole, bravery in defense of the 
common interests, fidelity to the community, sub- 
mission to the will of society, obedience and dis- 
cipline, truthfulness to society, ambition, sensibil- 
ity to the praise and blame of society — all of which 
exist already in animal societies, many even in a 
high degree. 

These social impulses are nevertheless nothing 
but the highest virtues; they sum up the entire 
moral code. At the most they lack the love for 
justice, that is, the impulse for equality. For its 
development there certainly is no place in the ani- 
mal societies, because they know only natural and 
individual but not social inequalities. The lofty 
moral law, that the comrade ought never to be 
merely a means to an end, a law which the Kan- 
tians look on as the most wonderful achievement of 
Kant's genius, and as the moral programme of the 
modern era is in the animal world a commonplace. 
The development of human society first created a 
state of affairs in which the companion became a 
simple tool of others. 



9 o 



The Basis of Morality 



"What appeared to Kant as the creation of a 
higher world of spirits, is a product of the animal 
world." 

To Kautsky's mind the moral law is an ani- 
mal impulse and nothing else. 

Hence, he says, "comes its mysterious nature, 
this voice in us which has no connection with any 
external impulse, or any apparent interest, this 
demon or god, which since Socrates and Plato, 
those moralists found in themselves who refused to 
deduce morality from self-love or pleasure. Cer- 
tainly a mysterious impulse, but not more mysteri- 
ous than sexual love, the maternal love, the instinct 
of self-preservation, the being of the organism it- 
self and so many other things, which only belong to 
the world of phenomena and which no one looks on 
as products of a supersensuous world." 

"Not from our organs of knowledge, but from 
our impulses comes the moral law and the moral 
judgment as well as feeling of duty and conscience." 

The social impulse, the moral law, is not depen- 
dent on intelligence. 

"With the stronger social feeling there need not 
necessarily be bound up a higher faculty of intelli- 
gence. In general every instinct probably has the 
effect to somewhat obscure the exact observation of 
the external world. The social instincts which do 
not show themselves as a rule so acutely and in- 
tensively, generally obscure much less the intellec- 
tual faculties. They can, however, influence them 



The Moral Law 



9i 



very considerably on occasions. . . . The moral 
law in us can lead our intellect astray just as any 
other impulse. In itself it is neither a product of 
wisdom nor does it produce wisdom. What is ap- 
parently the most elevated and divine in us, is es- 
sentially the same as that which we look on as the 
commonest and most devilish. The moral law is of 
the same nature as the instinct for reproduction. 
Nothing is more ridiculous, than when the former 
is put on a pedestal and the latter is turned away 
with loathing and contempt."* 

The social instincts and consequently also the 
moral law, as Kautsky goes on to explain, are sub- 
ject to more numerous and more different changes 
in human than in animal society so as to reach in it 
a peculiar and higher development. 

Since human society, in contrast to the animal, is 
continually changing, its members also are subject 
to continual changes even to the extent that their 
organs are transformed. But, "if the changes in 
society are able to transform the organism of man, 
his feet, his brain, how much the more are they able 
to alter his consciousness, his views of that which 
was useful and harmful, good and bad, possible and 
impossible ?"f 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 90-103. 
flbid. pp. 134, 135. 

For Morris Hillquit the moral sense is identical with the 
social instinct. For its origin and development he accounts 
as follows: 

"The moral sense is a product of the process of evolution 



92 



The Basis of Morality 



As causes which weaken or strengthen the social 
instinct in man Kautsky marks out language, war, 
property, competition, extension of society, and 
class division. Summing up the effects which these 
causes produce on it, he says : 

"We have seen that the economic development 
introduces into the moral factors transmitted from 
the animal world an element of pronounced muta- 
bility, in that it gives a varying degree of force to 
the social instincts and virtues at different times, 
and also at the same time in different classes; that 
it, however, in addition widens and then again nar- 
rows down the scope within which the social im- 
pulses have effect, on the one side expanding its in- 
fluence from the tiny tribe till it embraces the entire 
humanity, on the other side limiting it to a certain 
class within society."* 

The same economic development which changes 

in men the social instinct alters also the tenets or 

of man, gained in his early struggle for existence, precisely 
in the same manner as his intellectual qualities. It is a 
property of man in a state of society just as much as any of 
his physical organs." 

'The moral sense once evolved, in the course of time be- 
came a permanent trait of the human being, an innate or in- 
tuitive feeling, and in this sense the Idealistic theories of ethics 
have a certain degree of reason and justification. 'The social 
instinct,' says Ernst Haeckel, 'is always a physical habit, which 
was originally acquired, but which, in the course of time be- 
coming hereditary, appears at last innate.' " Socialism in 
Theory and Practice, pp. 50, 51. 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 174, 
175- 



The Moral Law 



93 



precepts of morality— the moral code. The expla- 
nation given by Kautsky in this regard deserves at- 
tention. 

"In the animal world we find only strong moral 
feelings, but no distinct moral precepts." For to 
address distinct demands to individuals, a language 
must first have been formed. But in man demands 
become precepts. 

When demands have their origin in the social 
relations, they revive again and again, as long as 
the latter last, and repeat themselves so often and 
so regularly that they become a habit, which is 
finally inherited (as the tendency to peculiar kinds 
of hunting is inherited by sporting dogs), and 
which certain suggestions suffice to arouse not only 
in those who first contracted it but also in their 
descendants. 

"Thus arise demands on the individual in so- 
ciety, the more numerous, the more complicated it 
is, which demands finally by force of habit become 
without long consideration recognized as moral 
commands." 

As the social relations, or in other words, the so- 
cial needs, are different under different social con- 
ditions, so also the moral precepts differ in the 
divers forms of society; and even in the same so- 
ciety, moral precepts undergo continual changes 
as conditions and needs vary in the course of time. 

"The connection between the tenets of morals 
and the social needs has been already proved by so 



94 



The Basis of Morality 



many practical examples, that we can accept it as 
a general rule. If, however, this connection ex- 
ists, then an alteration of society must necessitate 
an alteration in many moral precepts. Their change 
is thus not only nothing strange ; it would be much 
more strange if with the change of the cause the 
effect did not also change. These changes are neces- 
sary, for that very reason, because every form of 
society requires certain moral precepts suited to its 
condition."* 

In these ethical speculations, Kautsky develops 
some fundamental ideas which J. Dietzgen had 
laid down before him. To the philosopher of so- 
cialism morality, too, is a bodily instinct. The moral 
law in its generality is in one place enunciated by 
him in the following terms : 

"Thou shalt subordinate thy immediate passions 
to general health and life, thy personal needs to the 
needs of society." In another place by the shorter 
formula : 

"The moral world has but one command: per- 
manent social progress, limitless social evolution. "f 

Concerning particular moral laws, their rise and 
change, and the evolution of morality he says: 

"By this (inductive) method we find that the 
moral world generally consists of considerations 
dictated by the social needs of a given human or- 
ganization. Then we find the undeniable fact that 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 175-180. 
fPhilosophical Essays, pp. 167, 171. 



The Moral Law 



95 



social necessity develops with the progress of pro- 
ductive forces called civilization, that the social in- 
stinct of man grows, that human association be- 
comes broader and deeper, that morality becomes 
more moral." 

"Morality is based on the general need for social 
co-operation. With the growth of that need, moral- 
ity and civilization grow."* 

Particular moral precepts, though growing out 
of social needs, nevertheless can acquire an existence 
independent of society. Kautsky tells us how this 
may happen and what will be the consequence of it. 

"The moral rules alter with society, yet not un- 
interruptedly and not in the same fashion and de- 
gree as the social needs. They become promptly 
recognized and felt as rules of conduct, because 
they have become habit. Once they have taken root 
as such, they can for a long time lead an indepen- 
dent life, while technical progress advances, and 
therewith the development of the method of pro- 
duction, and the transformation of the social needs 
goes on. 

"It is with the principles of morality as with the 
rest of the complicated sociological superstructure 
which raises itself on the method of production. It 
can break away from its foundation and lead an 
independent life for a time." 

Morality, like other ideological factors, can react 
on the economic and social life. But its influence 
*Ibid. pp. 159, I 70- 



9 6 



The Basis of Morality 



will be beneficial only as long as it meets the social 
needs from which it sprung. 

If it is further developed and no longer under 
the control of society, its development will hereaf- 
ter be merely logical and formal. Its rules and prin- 
ciples then will ossify, become a conservative ele- 
ment, an obstacle to progress, a means of intoler- 
able restraint on social life, a matter of interest, and 
often of a very powerful interest. Then also 
physical compulsion will be necessary to enforce 
laws among those to whose needs they are no 
longer adapted or to whose interests they are 
opposed.* 

If, as the socialist philosophers maintain, the 
moral law has an animal and organic origin or is 
identical with the physical laws of universal evolu- 
tion, it evidently implies no necessity or obligation 
of a spiritual or moral nature, the observance or 
transgression of which could constitute merit or de- 
merit. The binding force is merely a physical neces- 
sity consisting subjectively in a habit, impulse or 
feeling, objectively in needs and dependence on 
others. Hence men, like the social animals, are ul- 
timately laid under the necessity of moral laws by 
their organic nature, by the habits they acquire and 
by the physical and social environment in which 
they live. Hence, too, conduct conformable or con- 
trary to them is no longer imputable to man, be- 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 184- 
187. 



The Moral Law 



97 



cause it is not the result of his own determination, 
not the choice of his own will. 

According to Kautsky the obligation or binding 
force of the moral law can not be anything else 
than the strength of the social instinct confirmed by 
habit. Bax regards obligation as the consciousness 
of the inadequacy of the individual and of his in- 
terests as an end to himself. 

"We find that the meaning of the ought of 
'conscience 5 of the moral impulse, moral sense, 
moral consciousness, or by whatever name it 
may be called, is nothing more or less than the 
implicit or explicit consciousness of the inadequacy 
of the individual and his interests as an end to him- 
self. This consciousness is pre-supposed in the ex- 
istence of human society at all. But although con- 
science, or the moral consciousness, is ultimate, the 
forms of its manifestation no less than its object, 
are determined by the conditions of economic and 
social evolution."* 

In Labriola's opinion the dictates of conscience, 
the ethical rules, are not a general law prior to hu- 
man conduct and regulating it, but, on the contrary, 
a result of it, an empirical fact, the index and sum- 
mary of the ethical formation which individual men 
have undergone under the conditions of life. 

"Ethics does not place itself nor does it engender 
itself. There is no such universal foundation of the 
ethical relations varied and variable, as that spirit- 
*Ethics of Socialism, p. 26. 



9 8 



The Basis of Morality 



ual entity which has been called the moral con- 
science, one and unique for all men. This abstract 
entity has been eliminated by criticism like all other 
such entities, that is to say, like all other faculties of 
the soul. . . . The moral conscience which 
really exists is an empirical fact, it is an index or 
summary of the relative ethical formation of each 
individual. If there can be in it material for science, 
this cannot explain the ethical relations by means 
of the conscience, but the very thing it needs is to 
understand how that conscience is formed."* 

An interpretation of conscience like this is evi- 
dently tantamount to a complete denial of any ob- 
ligation to which man is subject and to which he 
must conform his conduct. 

The view which socialists, like all other material- 
ists and determinists, hold on the nature of crime, 
is another proof that they have done away with 
moral obligation and know of no other than mere 
physical necessity. 

Crime is termed by R. Blatchford a consequence 
of heredity and environment. E. Untermann in a 
passage quoted above asks: "Where is the place 
where 'evil' enters the universe? where and when 
did 'sin' enter the cosmic process?" Enrico Ferri 
writes in the "International Socialist Review" : 

"Scientific study regards crime as the expression 
of a biological and psychological personality, act- 
ing in a physical and social environment." 
*Essays on the Materialist Conception of History, p. 207. 



The Moral Law 



99 



"From the innumerable centuries of primitive so- 
ciety to the end of the nineteenth century, crime 
has always been regarded, judged, hated and at- 
tacked as an act of wickedness. But according to 
scientific facts and abstractions of anthropology 
and criminal sociology, crime is simply a natural 
phenomenon, more or less noxious and more or less 
pathological."* 

But if the moral law is made void of obligation, 
what motive may effectively induce man to regulate 
his conduct in accordance with it, and what is it 
that may move and determine him to direct his ac- 
tions to social well-being as the ultimate end and 
object of his life? 

This is the last question we have to answer in the 
present discussion. 
*Int. Soc. Rev. April 1902. p. 705. 



CHAPTER V 



THE MORAL MOTIVE 

Sanctions superadded to law are powerful mo- 
tives urging its observance. Every law, therefore, 
not only according to ancient jurisprudence, but also 
according to Christian ethics, must be upheld and 
enforced by rewards promised for its observance 
and punishments established for its transgression. 
Socialists admit that in times past sanctions had to 
supplement the moral law. They became, as Kaut- 
sky conceives, necessary, when moral precepts, ceas- 
ing to be founded on the real social needs, sup- 
ported merely the interests of the possessing and 
ruling class to the detriment of the propertiless. 
Other socialist writers point out the several kinds of 
sanctions which were formerly in use for the pur- 
pose of enforcing laws. They were, we are told, in 
part civil, in part religious. Civil sanctions were en- 
acted by political laws and carried out by main 
force, in order to keep the lower classes in subjec- 
tion. Religious sanctions, proclaimed by priests, 
consisted in rewards to be obtained, and in punish- 
ments to be incurred, in a future immortal life. 
For the belief was then upheld among the people, 
that God as the author and avenger of the moral 
law was to inflict the heaviest penalties for diso- 

IOO 



The Moral Motive 



101 



bedience, and confer eternal bliss for humble sub- 
jection and sufferings undergone. 

But in the future socialist society, where moral 
ity will reach its highest development, such sanc- 
tions will no longer be in force. Belief in God and 
immortality, classes and class interests, govern- 
ments by the propertied will have disappeared, and 
exploitation of the poor by the rich will no longer 
be practised; for equal rights and equal economic 
conditions shall have been established among all 
members of the commonwealth. The nature itself 
of the new law forbids sanctions. For as the ex- 
istence of free will is denied and law consists in 
physical necessity, its observance or transgression, 
because not imputable to men, is not an injustice li- 
able to retribution. If this be so, what, then, is the 
motive of moral conduct? For without a motive 
man does not act morally. Two theories have been 
set forth to solve this problem. The first is that ad- 
vanced by Loria. 

In his opinion egoism will remain the motive of 
human action even in the final society, but will 
cease to be detrimental to right social relations, be- 
cause equal economic conditions established among 
men will remove all motives for doing wrong. 

"The morality of the final organisation of so- 
ciety," says he, "simply consists in the acts and ab- 
stentions that make for cohesion and social well- 
being. Individual egoism suffices as a motive, and 
no further sanction is necessary. By the very hy- 



102 



The Basis of Morality 



pothesis, all acts injurious to social cohesion and 
collective well-being, all forms of usurpation be- 
tween man and man, turn immediately to the disad- 
vantage of the agent himself, and this of itself is 
enough to show him that such conduct is contrary 
to his enlightened egoism." 

"From whatever side we look at the matter, 
abundant proof is offered that individual egoism of 
itself suffices to determine a system of morality, 
assuring social well-being, and corresponding to 
the highest ideal of virtue imaginable."* 

Loria attempts to substantiate this statement by 
the following reasons: 

"Under any economic system where men are free 
and equal, usurpation is both irrational and anti- 
egoistic, since it is bound to provoke a correspond- 
ing reaction rendering it harmful to the agent him- 
self; but where the economy is associative in char- 
acter the injury is especially marked."f 

"So long as economic conditions of themselves 
dissuade the individual from dealing detrimentally 
with his fellows, his very powerlessness of doing 
harm and the personal injury incurred by a malevo- 
lent act, together cause a love of the good and a 
horror of evil to grow up in his mind. Thus the ob- 
servance of pity and justice, though in reality im- 
posed by egoism, gradually suffers the recollection 
of its origin to be lost and assumes an ideal char- 

*Economic Foundations of Society, pp. 13, 15. 
flbid. pp. 13, 14. 



The Moral Motive 



103 



acter which makes of it a virtue worthy of being 
practised for its own end and independently of the 
utility of its effects."* 

Ingenious as these views of Loria and of a few 
other writers might seem to be, the great majority 
of socialists disavow them and adopt another the- 
ory of the moral motive that will operate in final 
society. However great the sway of egoism may 
have been in ages past, in the co-operative common- 
wealth, they tell us, the love of social well-being 
will become dominant and will of itself lead up to 
the purest and most elevated morality. The social 
instinct, then fully developed, will universally gen- 
erate in men unselfishness, self-renunciation, and 
obedience to moral precepts by which private inter- 
ests are subordinated to public, and conduct is di- 
rected to the attainment of social happiness. 
Should it in particular cases not be sufficient to pro- 
duce such generous dispositions, it will be sup- 
ported, not by compulsory sanctions, but by public 
opinion. As Kautsky says : 

"The classless society needs no such compulsory 
weapons. Certainly even in it the social instincts do 
not achieve the observance by every individual of 
the moral code; the strength of the social impulses 
is very different in the different individuals, and just 
as different as that of other instincts, those of self- 
maintenance and reproduction. The first do not al- 
ways win the upper hand. But as means of compul- 

*Ibid. p. 44. 



104 



The Basis of Morality 



sion, of punishment, of warning, for others, pub- 
lic opinion of the society suffices in such cases for 
the classless society. This does not create in us the 
moral law, the feeling of duty." 

"But public opinion works in a classless society 
as a sufficient weapon of policy to secure the public 
obedience to moral codes. The individual is so 
weak compared to society, that he has not the 
strength to defy their unanimous voice. This has 
so crushing an effect that it needs no further means 
of compulsion or punishment, to secure the undis- 
turbed course of social life."* 

But how is it that, while from the barbaric age 
up to this day egoism has had its fullest sway, it 
will at once die out, to make room for perfect un- 
selfishness and heroic disinterestedness in the com- 
ing socialist society; that human nature heretofore 
utterly corrupted will in a short time come to be 
changed and regenerated so as to become the very 
incarnation of virtue and morality? 

Socialist philosophers are at hand with the an- 
swer. Selfishness, mean egoism, ignorance, oppres- 
sion of others, disregard of public welfare are the 
natural offshoot of the economic conditions thus 
far prevailing, of private property, of class strug- 
gle, of the oppression and exploitation of the prop- 
ertiless by the possessing and ruling class, supported 
by law and government and fostered by the Church. 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 188, 
189. 



The Moral Motive 



105 



The normal development of social instincts, on the 
contrary, devotedness to the common welfare, peace, 
concord, mutual love, appreciation of science and 
arts, enlightenment of a superior kind will be the 
natural effects of future social conditions, in which 
all shall be free and of equal rights, provided with 
the necessary means of subsistence, not oppressed 
by labor, and given the best chances for education. 
Under such conditions and in such a social and 
physical environment, the innate perfections of 
human nature, thus far stunted and nipped in the 
bud in capitalistic society, will unfold like flowers 
in the sunny springtide and develop into the fairest 
beauty. Morality will then reach its highest grade 
by a necessary evolution from man's social nature 
ennobled and regenerated. 

Marx has spoken of the changes which the hu- 
man character will undergo in the happy days of 
the future commonwealth. Bebel frequently en- 
larges on them in his "Woman," while at the same 
time he attributes the degrading egoism now ob- 
taining to the evil influence of capitalism. Kautsky 
gives us a glimpse at the moral elevation in the so- 
cialist society when he says : 

"Socialism abolishes need and surfeit and all that 
is unnatural, and makes man joyous of life and 
beauty, and capable of pleasure. And, in addition, 
it brings freedom of scientific and artistic creative 
activity for all." 

"May we not assume that under these conditions 



io6 



The Basis of Morality 



a new type of mankind will evolve which will sur- 
pass the highest type which culture has produced 
up till now? An overman, if you please, not as an 
exception, but as the rule; an overman compared 
with his ancestors, but not with his fellow-men; an 
elevated man who seeks his satisfaction not in be- 
ing great among crippled dwarfs but great among 
great, happy with the happy, who draws his 
strength not by raising himself on the bodies of the 
crushed, but by gaining courage through the union 
with men of similar aspirations, the courage to 
venture on grappling with the highest problems. 

"Thus, we can expect that a kingdom of strength 
and of beauty will arise which will be worthy of 
the ideals of our loftiest and noblest thinkers."* 

E. Ferri in his "Socialism and Modern Science"! 
finds in the change of the human character by the 
new economic conditions the solution of nearly all 
objections raised against the promised happiness 
in the co-operative commonwealth. 

American socialist authors concur in these views. 
From our former treatise, the "Characteristics and 
the Religion of Modern Socialism," Part II, Chap- 
ters V and VI, we already know what heroic self- 
renunciation and spirit of self-sacrifice G. D. Her- 
ron expects to hold sway in future society. Other 
writers essay to show how in final society a new 

*On the Morrow of Social Revolution. Translated by J. B. 

Askew. London 1903. p. 43. 
fSee in particular, pp. 110-125. 



The Moral Motive 



107 



morality and a new character will be developed by 
the influence of economic conditions, by natural 
selection and biological mutation. 

Charles Kerr, after asserting that under social- 
ism morality will be the usual thing and immoral- 
ity the rare exception, meets the objection that hu- 
man nature can not be changed. To solve it he says : 

"Let us examine briefly the natural impulses of 
this human nature of ours, and see what they lead 
to under the conditions we are suffering. Most im- 
portant of these impulses are the desires for good 
food, comfortable clothing and shelter, beauty of 
art and nature, pleasant odor and pleasant sounds, 
social intercourse, friendship and love. Also to be 
considered is the natural impulse, which we may 
call laziness for lack of a better term, to expend 
no more energy than is necessary for the attain- 
ment of any given desire. . . . But with private 
property in machinery and land abolished, and with 
production carried on in common for the common 
good, each member of society will be able to gratify 
nearly all these desires by a few hours of social 
labor each day, while if he should try to shirk this 
labor he would find much more exertion necessary 
in any other way. Thus the same natural impulses 
which now lead men to plunder each other will un- 
der socialism lead them to help each other. Then 
for the first time the golden rule 'Whatsoever ye 
would that men should do unto you, do ye even so 
unto them,' will become a possible and natural way 



io8 



The Basis of Morality 



of living, instead of something to preach on Sun- 
days and to explain away on week days."* 

In a paper on "Weismannism and Socialism" 
Hermann Whittaker prognosticates selection, as it 
will work in future society and affect the human 
character. 

"When this final triumph of organization (the 
harmonization of the systems of production and dis- 
tribution) shall have been accomplished, a new 
form of direct social selection will replace the old 
injurious, indirect selection. With freedom, secur- 
ity in the means of livelihood, and equal oppor- 
tunity, the premium of brute force and cunning will 
be withdrawn and the human personality will work 
out its survival. Personality will become a keen 
selective principle, based not on over-population 
and competition, but on the self-destruction which 
comes from drunkenness and disease; whose de- 
graded offspring will perish, or feed the ranks of 
the degenerates to be properly segregated and 
ended. 

"With education and opportunity, higher forms 
of human character will increase and survive, and 
with the independence and freedom of woman, sex- 
ual selection will become a refined and powerful 
agent of progress. The blind god of chance will be 
dethroned, and a conscious humane social selection, 
inflexible in decree but gentle in methods, replace 
the present imperfect process, and the individual 

*Morals and Socialism, pp. 13, 14. 



The Moral Motive 



109 



struggle of man and man will be transformed into 
a collective struggle against the forces of nature."* 

Similarly Murray E. King derives the moral 
perfection and beauty of socialism from the natural 
law of social selection. 

"The saving grace of socialism lies in the sub- 
stitution, as a natural law, of the law of social se- 
lection in which the best survive, in place of the law 
of commercial and military selection in which the 
strongest survive. "f 

As to the changing of human nature through the 
influence of perfect economic conditions J. M. 
Work is quoted by the "Worker" as saying: 

"After the first stages of Socialism have been 
passed, after the primary objects of Socialism have 
been attained, after property and exploitation have 
been abolished, and after economic justice has been 
secured, it is expected that Socialism will gradually 
develop in its ideal beauty, that men will gradually 
lose their lower instincts, that they will become 
more interested in making the human race happy 
than in making themselves happy. In short, that 
selfishness will, to a very large degree, give away to 
unselfishness. In order to attain this advanced or 
ideal stage of Socialism, human nature will have 
to be changed. It will have to evolve to a higher 
stage of development. And Socialism will provide 

*Int. Soc. Rev. March 1901. pp. 522, 523. 
flbid. Dec. 1904. p. 338. See also Int. Soc. Rev. May 1902. 
p. 782. Sept. 1905. p. 175. 



no 



The Basis of Morality 



the conditions wherein it will be easy for human na- 
ture to make that change."* 

The predictions concerning the final socialist so- 
ciety, as contained in the above quotations, express 
great hopes for the moral regeneration of man- 
kind and open a splendid view into a better and 
happier world. But is there any prospect of their 
realization? Will the economic conditions aimed 
at by socialism ever be established in human so- 
ciety? and if, indeed, they could be established, is 
it likely that they could remedy the social evils un- 
der which we now labor, and, by transforming hu- 
man nature, raise out of the present disorder a new 
paradise of beauty, happiness, and innocence? 

We can not here enter on a discussion of such 
probabilities, but we shall consider them in another 
part of our treatise. For the present we shall give 
but a summary review of the basis of morality as 
laid down in socialist philosophy. 

Morality is there considered a bodily or animal 
quality, and of animal origin ; for it is common to 
brute and man, being in both of the same kind, and 
higher in man only in degree. And so, too, the 
moral act is not spiritual, but organic, not put forth 
with rational deliberation and freedom, but with 
natural necessity. Moral goodness or badness is 
not absolute, eternal, and necessary, but by its very 
nature relative and variable according to time and 
circumstances, so much so that the very same ac- 
*The Worker. Aug. 19, 1905. 



The Moral M otive 1 1 1 



tions are good in one place and bad in another, 
right in a lower stage of economic and social de- 
velopment, and wrong in a higher. The end of 
man with reference to which actions are termed 
good or bad, consists, according to the opinion of 
some, in individual temporal well-being harmon- 
ized with general well-being, according to the 
opinion of others, in social or common welfare as 
attainable during our earthly existence, united with 
conscious furtherance, however, of personal inter- 
ests. Yet, whether conceived in one way or another, 
the ultimate end and purpose of morality has not 
been known and pursued thus far; for throughout 
all the civilized ages egoism, supported by State 
and Church, reigned supreme, aiming only at the 
welfare of the possessing, and working the oppres- 
sion of the laboring classes. The true end of man is 
being recognized since the proletariat, awakened 
to self-consciousness, is beginning to struggle for 
emancipation, and it will be achieved only when, 
through the introduction of socialized ownership 
in the means of production, the final or socialist so- 
ciety will have come into existence. 

The moral law, by which actions and conduct are 
directed to the common welfare, is not different 
from the natural law which governs the world- 
process, the general evolution of the visible uni- 
verse. Hence, moreover, it lays no obligation in the 
proper sense on the human will, but subjects it to 
physical necessity. As such it is identical with the 



112 



The Basis of Morality 



social instinct which was first evolved in brutes by 
the survival of the fittest, and later on inherited and 
further developed by man. The special moral pre- 
cepts, making up the moral code, arise from social 
needs under the varying economic conditions preva- 
lent in each historical epoch. When, as was often 
the case in times past, they cease to correspond to 
the real social needs and aim at oppression of the 
dispossessed classes, they need the support of sanc- 
tions, rewards and punishments, temporal and 
eternal, in order to hold the oppressed classes to 
their observance or deter them from their violation. 
But, after the introduction of normal economic con- 
ditions in final society, they will be observed spon- 
taneously and from no motive of retribution dealt 
out to the virtuous or the wicked. For then the 
social instinct, having reached its fullest develop- 
ment, will deaden all selfishness and enliven de- 
votedness to social welfare to such an extent that 
with universal temporal happiness the highest de- 
gree of morality will also be reached. 

If, however, as Loria conceives, man's ultimate 
end consists in individual well-being, and egoism is 
the necessary motive of action in all stages of evolu- 
tions, then laws and sanctions varying with times 
and circumstances are necessary so long as oppres- 
sion and inequality obtain among men. But as soon 
as equality in economic conditions is established in 
society, not only will compulsion but even moral 
precepts become superfluous, because those actions 



The Moral Motive 



113 



will then conduce to personal happiness which are 
likewise subservient to social well-being. 

R. Rives La Monte sums up the basic principles 
of socialist morality in a poem, which is clearer and 
more drastic in language than any philosophical 
reasoning can be. The reader may be pleased to see 
it reproduced here. 

"What are 'wrong,' 'right,' 'vice,' 'virtue,' 'bad,' and 'good' ? 
Mere whips to scourge the backs that naked bear 
The burden of the world — bent backs that dare 
Not rise erect, defy the tyrant 'Should,' 
And freely, boldly do the things they would. 
In living's joy they rarely have a share; 
They look beyond the grave, and hope that there 
They'll be repaid, poor fools, for being good. 
To serve thy master, that is virtue. Slave ; 
To do thy will, enjoy sweet life, is vice. 
Poor duty-ridden serf, rebel, forget 
Thy master-taught morality ; be brave 
Enough to make this earth a Paradise 
Whereon the Sun of Joy shall never set."* 



^Socialism, Positive and Negative, p. 57. 



PART II 
The Ethics of Individual Life 



CHAPTER I 

INDIVIDUAL CONDUCT OUTSIDE THE SPHERE OF 
MORALITY 

To REGULATE all human conduct, individual as 
well as social, is the proper province of ethics. 
True, social life concerns the moral philosopher in' 
a particular manner. The welfare of society, be- 
cause it coincides with the well-being of mankind as 
a whole, deserves his special attention, and the 
social relations, manifold and intricate as 
they are, require his most careful consideration. 
But for all that individual life can not be 
overlooked by him. It has its end and purpose 
just as well as society; according to this end it 
must be ordered, and in the effectiveness of 
this order consists its beauty and its moral per- 
fection. 

Theistic philosophy has regulated the life of in- 
dividual man first by subjecting his lower faculties 
to reason, which is supreme in him, and then by 
subordinating reason itself to God, the Supreme 
Good and the Supreme Lord. 

114 



Individual Conduct Outside of Morality 1 1 5 



But here we meet at once with a decided oppo- 
sition on the part of socialist philosophers. Reject- 
ing any relation of man to God, and any sub- 
jection of man's lower faculties to reason as their 
law, they disavow moral precepts for individual 
life. Thus they arrive at the conclusion that, 
while social conduct alone is within the province 
of ethics, the self-regarding actions, which consti- 
tute individual conduct, are not even capable of 
morality. 

Their statements in this regard are very 
plain. 

"Ethics and morality," says Bebel, "are 
the expression of conceptions that regulate 
the relations of man to man and their mutual 
conduct."* 

J. Dietzgen says concerning the labor of the 
scholar: 

"We call all these actions virtue and morality, 
because they have a collective or social value, which 
proves the correctness of our definition of moral- 
ity."t 

A. M. Simons in a critique of Professor 
A. W. Small's "General Sociology" affirms that 
there can be no other kind of ethics than social 
ethics. "J 

*Woman. p. 322. 

t Philosophical Essays, p. 164. 

tint. Soc. Rev. Feb. 1906. p. 452. 



1 1 6 The Ethics of Individual Life 



Ladoff is still more explicit when he says: 
"There is and cannot be any such thing as 'per- 
sonal morality.' Personal morality is a contradic- 
tion in terms (contradictio in adjecto) . Morality is 
essentially a social term."* Morris Hillquit fully 
agrees with the authors just quoted, when he 
says : 

"It is pretty generally agreed that the conduct of 
which ethics takes cognizance is not the conduct of 
associated human beings acting as such (for that 
properly belongs to the domain of politics) , but the 
conduct of the individual. At the same time, how- 
ever, it is not individual human conduct that falls 
within the sphere of ethics. . . . To be ethical 
or unethical, human actions must have some bear- 
ing on beings other than the actor himself; they 
must be tested by their social effects. A number of 
authorities extend the operation of ethics to con- 
duct towards oneself and one's fellow-men ; philos- 
ophers of the theological school include conduct 
towards God within the purview of ethics, while 
the thinkers of the evolutionary biological school 
with Spencer at the head, classify ethical conduct 
as conduct towards self, offspring and race. 
But on closer examination, it will be found that 
the addition of all factors other than the 
purely social factor, is meaningless or confus- 
ing. Ethics remains indifferent to the conduct 
*Ibid. Feb. 1905. p. 449. 



Individual Conduct Outside of Morality 117 

of the individual towards himself, as long as 
that conduct does not directly or indirectly affect 
the well-being of his fellow-men or the human 
race.* 

Morality must, indeed, be conceived as essen- 
tially social, if it is supposed to consist in the rela- 
tion of the action to social welfare as man's ul- 
timate end, and if the moral law directing human 
conduct is placed in the social instinct. It must be 
conceived as such also, if it is placed with Loria 
in actions and abstentions that make for social 
cohesion and social well-being. But if morality 
is essentially social, then actions which further or 
hinder the commonweal are morally good or bad, 
and actions which bear no relation to it, but are 
merely self-regarding, are morally indifferent, 
neither moral nor immoral. 

Socialist writers specify the actions which are to 
be considered as self-regarding, and as lying out- 
side of the sphere of the moral law. 

Bax speaking of sexual matters says : 

"Society is directly concerned with the (1) pro- 
duction of offspring, (2) with the care that things 
sexually offensive to the majority shall not be ob- 
truded on public notice, or obscenity on 'young per- 
sons.' Beyond this all sexual actions (of course 
excluding criminal violence or fraud) are matters 
of a purely individual concern. When a sexual act 

^Socialism in Theory and Practice, pp. 37, 38. 



1 1 8 The Ethics of Individual Life 



from whatever cause is not and cannot be produc- 
tive of offspring, the feeling of the majority has no 
locus standi in the matter. Not only is it properly 
outside of the sphere of coercion, but it does not 
concern morality at all. It is a question simply of 
individual taste. The latter may be good or bad, 
but this is an aesthetic and not directly a moral or 
social question."* 

Bebel goes yet farther. 

"Under the proviso that he inflict injury upon 
none, the individual shall himself oversee the satis- 
faction of his own instincts. The satisfaction of the 
sexual instinct is as much a private concern as the 
satisfaction of any other natural instinct. None is 
therefore accountable to others, and no unsolicited 
judge may interfere. How I shall eat, how I shall 
drink, how I shall sleep, how I shall clothe my- 
self, is my private affair — exactly so any intercourse 
with a person of the opposite sex. Intelligence and 
culture, perfect individual freedom— qualities that 
become normal through the education and the con- 
ditions of future society — will guard everyone 
against the commission of acts that will redound to 
his injury. Self-training and the knowledge of their 
own being are possessions of the men and women of 
future society to a degree much above the present. 
The simple circumstance that all bashful prudery 
and affectation of secrecy regarding natural matters 
will have vanished is a guarantee of a more natural 
*Ethics of Socialism, p. 126. 



Individual Conduct Outside of Morality 119 

intercourse of the sexes than that which prevails 
to-day."* 

The moral basis laid by socialist philosophy 
proves too narrow to draw private conduct within 
the sphere of morality. 

*Woman. pp. 343, 344. 



CHAPTER II 



EVILS FROM WHICH INDIVIDUAL LIFE MUST BE 
FREE 

Though personal conduct is thus considered 
outside the sphere of morality, still socialist philos- 
ophers give advice and direction concerning it. 
They must, indeed, do so. For society is dependent 
on the right and normal development of individual 
life, just as the body is dependent on the health of 
its particular organs, or as Marx in the communis- 
tic manifesto says, the free development of each is 
the condition of the free development of all. 

Their advice is usually not so rigoristic as that of 
P. Burrowes, who has hardly a word for the con- 
duct and the beautifying of the private soul, except 
that he counsels depersonalization in will and habit. 
Such rigor would be ill-suited on their part; for it 
would be a death-blow at personal dignity and inde- 
pendence, in plain contradiction to the liberty and 
equality so strongly asserted by them. It is, on the 
contrary, their purpose to render individual life as 
free and pleasant as possible. Bebel, Bax, Kerr, 
and Untermann have pointed out both the evils 
from which it must be exempted, and the course 
which its normal development must follow. 

First of all there ought to be in individual life 

I20 



Individual Life Free From Evils 121 

no unnecessary or useless self-sacrifice, no asceti- 
cism, no impediment to full development that can 
be removed by resistance. 

As to unnecessary self-sacrifice, Chas. H. Kerr 
writes : 

"Self-sacrifice for the sake of a great cause is 
the surest way to your happiness, and the struggle 
of the working class for freedom which is now 
coming to an end is the greatest of all causes, for it 
will put an end to nearly all misery in the world. 
But self-sacrifice for the sake of self-sacrifice or for 
the comfort of some person who is too stupid to be 
thankful for it — this injures the one who makes it 
and helps no one. 

"I know one kind of woman who always waits 
on her husband and children, gives up every pos- 
sible pleasure to add to their comfort, wears old 
clothes that the rest of the family may be well 
dressed, and I have noticed that she wears out her 
life so that she cannot give happiness or strength 
to anyone, while her husband and children grow in- 
to taking all her self-denial as a matter of course, 
so that she does not get half the love and tenderness 
that her heart is hungry for. 

"I know another kind of woman who is as loving 
and womanly as the first, but who is thoughtful 
enough to see that she must be happy herself if she 
is to make those she loves happy, and that she will 
consult their best welfare if she expects from them 
just as much regard for her happiness as she shows 



122 



The Ethics of Individual Life 



for theirs. Love must be equal to bring a joy that 
lasts."* 

Bax combats asceticism. 

"The New Ethic of Socialism has no part or lot 
with asceticism. In the first place, it grudges the 
amount of energy required to be expended by the 
individual in his effort to acquire the 'self-disci- 
pline/ so-called, which is only another name for the 
moral tight-rope-dancing which the Ethic of in- 
wardness postulates as its end. It despises the in- 
trospectionist's love of striking an ethical attitude. 
The mere discomfort or the sacrifice of the indi- 
vidual per se is for it no virtue, but a folly, unless it 
be part of the means to a clearly defined social end. 
We italicise the words clearly defined, since, as 
above indicated, it is possible to smuggle in, under 
some vague, high-sounding phrase, such as those 
already given, the old theological Ethic, asceticism 
included. "f 

"Once more, I repeat, let us make no mistake, all 
asceticism, all privation, is in itself an unmitigated 
evil. It is doubtless true that there are occasions 
when it is our duty, living in a period of struggle, 
to deprive ourselves, to sacrifice ourselves, for a 
better society. But even this privation, this sacri- 
fice, is in itself an evil. It only becomes a good if 
it is undergone with the purpose of putting an end 
to the sempiternal privation and sacrifice which 

*The Folly of Being Good. pp. 15, 16. 
fEthics of Socialism, p. 21. 



Individual Life Free From Evils 123 



civilization imposes on the majority of our fellow 
creatures."* 

E. Untermann wants the removal of impedi- 
ments to full development. 

"The ethics of historical materialism teach free- 
dom, not submission. They do not teach self-de- 
nial, but self-control. They demand and strive for 
every opportunity that will develop all the qualities 
essential to a full life. The old ethics say: 'Resist 
not evil/ The new ethics cry out: 'Resist every ele- 
ment in your environment which is an obstacle or a 
danger to your fullest development. "f 

After having thus removed what they consider 
as chief evils and essential impediments to personal 
well-being, socialist philosophers come to deter- 
mine the norm according to which development of 
individual life must proceed. 

*Ibid. pp. 145, 146. 

tint. Soc. Rev. Aug. 1904. p. 72. 



CHAPTER III 



NORMAL DEVELOPMENT OF INDIVIDUAL LIFE 

The normal development of the individual must 
be natural, that is, in accordance with his nature. 
But man, as socialist philosophers conceive him, is 
merely an animal without any spiritual or super- 
natural element in him, evolved from the brute, 
and, as Engels says in his "Anti-Duehring," even 
in his higher stage of evolution not free from brut- 
ish instincts or bestiality. To this nature human 
development must correspond, if it is to be natural; 
it must be the development of the animal in man, 
and proceed according to the law and necessities in- 
herent in animal nature and organic life in general. 
Bebel very forcibly insists on naturalness of this 
kind. 

"In order to be clear on the causes and develop- 
ment of good or bad qualities, whether with the 
sexes or whole peoples, the same methods must be 
pursued that modern natural science applies in or- 
der to ascertain the formation and development of 
life according to genus and species, and to deter- 
mine their qualities. They are the laws that flow 
from the material conditions for life, laws that life 
demands, that adapt themselves to it, and finally be- 
come its nature. 

124 



Normal Development of Individual Life 125 

"Man forms no exception to that which holds 
good in Nature for all animate creation. Man does 
not stand outside of Nature: looked at physiolog- 
ically, he is the most highly developed animal — a 
fact, however, that some would deny."* 

The model of natural development which 
brought out in man the highest physical and intel- 
lectual qualities, the model which we ought to imi- 
tate in our age, in order to regenerate and elevate 
the human race, is found in classical antiquity, in 
ancient Greece and Rome. Bebel and Stern in Ger- 
many, Kerrf in America, call our special attention 
to this great example set for us. We read in Bebel's 
"Woman": 

"Thousands of years ago, although wholly ig- 
norant of modern science, the ancients had on many 
matters affecting man, more rational views than the 
moderns; above all, they gave practical application 
to the views founded on experience. We praise 
with enthusiastic admiration the beauty and 
strength of the men and women of Greece; but the 
fact is overlooked that, not the happy climate, nor 
the bewitching nature of a territory that stretched 
along the bay-indented sea, but the physical cul- 
ture and maxims of education, consistently enforced 
by the State, thus affected both the being and the 
development of the population. These measures 
were calculated to combine beauty, strength and 

*Woman. p. 118. 

fThe Folly of Being Good. pp. 5, 6. 



126 



The Ethics of Individual Life 



suppleness of body with wit and elasticity of mind, 
both of which were transmitted to the descendants. 
True enough, even then, in comparison with man, 
woman was neglected in point of mental, but not of 
corporal culture." 

Bebel, then, in particular proposes as a model 
Spartan education with all its coarse sensuality, 
which modesty forbids to describe in detail.* 

Normal development, furthermore, requires that 
all appetites of man be gratified and all his faculties 
be exercised. Bebel lays special stress on the gratifi- 
cation of the sexual impulse, not only as a necessity 
of nature, but also as an indispensable condition for 
bodily and mental health. Celibacy is condemned 
by him as a cause of disease and serious disturb- 
ances and, under certain conditions, even of in- 
sanity and death.f 

At last by normal development the lower facul- 
ties must be so trained as to be made helpful to the 
exercise of the higher mental powers. This subor- 
dination, however, we should not understand as 
meaning a distinction between a bodily and spiritual 
element in man; for, as we just heard Bebel explain, 
sense and intellect are equally organic faculties, and 
animal and mental desires are the effect of the one 
combined organism. But how is this subserviency 
of the body to the mind obtained, according to so- 
cialist psychology? 

* Woman, pp. 118, 119. 
tlbid. pp. 79-82. 



Normal Development of Individual Life 127 

Bax has devoted special studies to the solution of 
this question. He finds first that the suppression of 
bodily wants prevents the development of a higher 
life, be it moral, intellectual, or artistic. 

"The continued struggle against natural wants, 
to live on next to nothing, to bear the greatest pri- 
vations, in itself draws off vast stores of moral 
energy which is wasted on mere suppression. But 
if the victory is gained, if the man does not succumb 
in the process, if his devotion to the higher aim, 
of whatever nature it may be, is so exceptionally 
great as to carry him through, what has he gained 
and what has he lost? He is purified through suf- 
fering, says the Christian. But in how many cases 
he metaphorically leaves his skin behind in the proc- 
ess; in how many cases he has lost an essential part 
of himself, those know who have had much inter- 
course with or who have studied the exceptional 
men who have successfully struggled with advers- 
ity, and who have observed the souredness, the one- 
sidedness, the twistedness, so to say, of the character 
thence resulting. No one can fail to admire and to 
honor the strength of purpose which enables man 
to pursue a high aim in the midst of privations; but 
no one who looks at the matter without prejudice 
and in the light of broad human interests, can hon- 
estly say that the man is better as man for priva- 
tions through which he is come, even though he has 
accomplished his life work in spite of them."* 

*Ethics of Socialism, p. 140. 



128 The Ethics of Individual Life 



Secondly, the satisfaction of the bodily wants is 
a necessary means to accomplish higher aims and to 
develop intellectual life. 

"So long as they (bodily wants) remain a desid- 
eratum for the majority of mankind, the majority 
of mankind will regard them as the one end of life 
■ — notwithstanding the precept and example of the 
heroic ascetic who despises such low concerns. Let 
the mass of men once have free access to the means 
of satisfaction, and they will then for the first time 
feel the need of higher objects in life. 

"As a matter of fact, it is a trite observation that 
all the 'higher life' of the world has been carried 
on by those classes who have been free from the 
presence of material wants, not by those who have 
been deprived of them or have renounced them. 
What did the really consistent Christian ascetics — 
the St. Anthonies of the fourth century for example 
— accomplish beyond seeing visions, performing as- 
tounding feats of self-privation, etc. ? Were they 
more than moral mountebanks ? Do we not find, on 
the contrary, that the monks who really led the in- 
tellectual life of the middle ages, who were his- 
torians, philosophers, artists, spring from the 
wealthy Benedictines and other orders whose disci- 
pline was 'lax,' who kept a well-filled refectory, and 
whose morality was said to be questionable? So 
long as monasticism remained ascetic, intellectual 
life within the monasteries was impossible. Bodily 
cravings occupied men's whole attention. 



Normal Development of Individual Life 129 

"Another and still more striking instance of how 
the fact of every possible sensual enjoyment being 
within reach forces the mind to seek satisfaction in 
something, which if it is not intellectual is at least 
non-sensual, is that of the tyrannos of the ancient 
city, or the wealthy noble, the provincial governor, 
the pro-consul, the prefect of the Roman Empire. 
No one can adequately conceive now-a-days of the 
luxury and sensual pleasure in which such characters 
as these literally weltered." 

"The true telos of human life, the 'rational ac- 
tivity' of Aristotle, 'the beautiful, the good, the 
true' of the young man who is taking to literary 
composition, may be compared, not to speak it pro- 
fanely, to the odd trick in whist, which, though it is 
the object of the hand to win, yet presupposes the 
winning of six other tricks. Now the amateur of 
the 'goody-goody' morality — the perfectionist of 
individual character — thinks to make the odd trick 
without having completed his regulation half- 
dozen. The socialist is rather concerned that the 
human race as a whole, should each and all 'make' 
the first six tricks, called respectively, good and 
sufficient food and drink, good housing, good cloth- 
ing, fuel, untaxed locomotion, adequate sexual 
satisfaction, knowing that before these are scored 
the 'odd,' which is the final purpose of the 'deal,' 
will be impossible." 

"One can scarcely conceive the nobler life which 
will result from generations of satisfied (rather 



130 The Ethics of Individual Life 



than repressed) animal desires, once they are the 
lot not of this or that class, but of all. With food, 
drink, and other creature comforts to be had for 
the asking, they will cease to occupy the attention 
of human beings to an extent previously unknown 
in the world's history. Then for the first time will 
the higher aspirations and faculties of man have 
free play, the 'something more,' the 'odd' trick, 
which is the real goal of human life, will assume a 
new character, and be pursued with an energy rival- 
ling that hitherto devoted to personal gain, ambition 
or glory, since the path to these things, at least in 
the old sense, will have been closed for ever."* 

The features drawn up in the preceding lines 
hold up to our view individual life as socialist phi- 
losophers promise it to the working class in the new 
social order, which in a not far future is to be es- 
tablished on earth. It lies, as we have seen, out- 
side the sphere of morality and is for this very rea- 
son under no law or moral precepts. It has no du- 
ties implying obligation either toward God, or self, 
or others as long as its actions do not bear on them. 
Not even the dictates of conscience can restrain it; 
good taste and liberal education are its only ad- 
visers. Its freedom and independence is absolute. 

But with all that it is but animal, though in the 
highest stage of evolution. To be normally de- 
veloped as such, all its animal desires, all its bodily 
wants and instincts, and in particular the sexual, 
*Ethics of Socialism, pp. 142-147. 



Normal Development of Individual Life 131 

must be fully satisfied. No self-discipline or self- 
denial must be practised, no privation must be un- 
dergone, no sacrifices be made, those alone ex- 
cepted which are necessary for a clearly defined so- 
cial end. Sensual gratification must be full, unre- 
stricted, and unrestrained. And that it may be 
such, the future socialist society will furnish ample 
means and opportunities. 

Nor is man's dignity in any way lessened or low- 
ered on account of unrestricted sensual gratifica- 
tion. For the sensual and sexual instincts rank as 
high as the moral instinct, as high as the intellec- 
tual and rational faculties. Nay, the latter can de- 
velop their highest activity, realize a superior de- 
gree of human culture, only when the fullest enjoy- 
ment is granted to the senses. 

But how shall we judge of individual human 
life thus constituted, animal, and sensual without 
restraint, and yet highly cultured and intellectual? 
From the materialistic point of view, as taken by 
socialists, the full and unrestricted satisfaction of 
all animal instincts can not be objected to as wrong 
or incongruous. For if man is but an animal, the 
highest of the mammals, as Herbert Spencer would 
say, his sensual cravings and desires may, indeed, 
be fully satisfied; nor is there any reason why in 
satisfying them he should be subject to any higher 
law demanding self-denial and self-discipline. And 
not only is this consistent teaching, but it may also 
prove the most attractive feature of socialist ethics. 



132 The Ethics of Individual Life 

When, by spreading broadcast an atheistic and 
materialistic literature among the masses, religion 
shall have become extinct; when the moral law, 
sanction, and retribution shall have been done away 
with as mere fictions, and all hope for happiness in 
a future and immortal life shall have been given 
up as vain and deceitful : then the working classes, 
smarting under hardships and privations, will 
gladly accept a moral code which allows them the 
unrestrained gratification of their lower instincts, 
and clamorously welcome a new form of society, 
which holds out to them all the sensual pleasures 
enjoyed before their eyes by the luxurious Croe- 
suses of our industrial era. 

/ But there is no logical consistency in the conten- 
tion of socialists that unrestricted sensuality will 
lead to higher intellectual and moral culture. 
There are in human nature intense and vehement 
passions, the most impetuous of which is the sexual 
appetite, passions which do not harmonize with 
reason, but revolt against its dictates, because the 
spheres of sense and reason do not coincide, but are 
discordant in many regards. To deny this would 
be directly to contradict the experience of all his- 
tory. Granting passions, which are naturally strong 
and powerful, full satisfaction, exempting them 
from every restriction, denying them nothing they 
crave, still increases their power and vehemence; 
for thus to their natural inclination the force of 
habit is added like a second nature. It is the task 



Normal Development of Individual Life 133 

of man to control passions by his reason and the 
power of his will, and in the accomplishment of 
this task consists his dignity and pre-eminence, his 
real culture and moral greatness. But it is a diffi- 
cult task requiring the utmost effort and energy, so 
difficult, indeed, that comparatively few men suc- 
ceed in obtaining a perfect control and mastery, 
difficult even when passions have only their natural 
strength and vehemence, but infinitely more so, 
when they have been intensified and have grown 
over-strong by the force of habit. 

How does socialist philosophy support reason in 
maintaining its superiority over such rebellious 
subjects? Its ethics debars the rational will from 
all the higher motives, such as beauty of virtue, the 
sublimity of the divine perfections, the hope of 
happiness in an immortal life and union with the 
deity; withdraws it from the influence of a superior 
law which binds it by obligations and lays it under 
moral necessity; encourages it by no promise of 
rewards and deters it by no threat of punishment. 
It forbids man to restrain his passions by self-de- 
nial and self-discipline, thus to diminish their 
power and break their violence; and commands 
him, on the contrary, to yield to them, to foster, 
and to gratify them. By so doing, it weakens his 
will, dissipates his energy in combat, while at the 
same time it allows the habit of complying with 
their behests to strengthen continually. Is it not 
a psychological necessity under such conditions, 



134 The Ethics of Individual Life 



that reason shall succumb and passion rule su- 
preme? 

Beyond all doubt, an excited passion, especially 
when intensified by habit, solicits gratification from 
the will with far greater power than virtue or 
social well-being have to induce to the performance 
of labor, or the undergoing of hardships. For the 
gratification of a passion is a present and palpable 
good of a concrete nature; virtue or social well- 
being, a future good of an abstract kind; the 
former is enjoyment, the latter a painful self-sacri- 
fice. But a will, weakened by habitually yielding 
to sensual impulses and sustained by no higher and 
ideal motives, instead of being disposed to struggle 
at the cost of great sacrifices for the spiritual and 
social good, is most strongly inclined to seek and 
embrace sensual gratifications, which, free from 
hardship and full of pleasure, are for it the most 
powerful allurement. Do not history and experi- 
ence confirm and illustrate this statement? Did not 
the Greeks and Romans, held up by the socialists as 
models of intellectual and moral development, per- 
ish in their luxuries by vice, corruption, effeminacy, 
immorality? Vice versa, are not the capitalists, ab- 
horred by these very same socialists as monsters of 
vice, injustice, immorality, and even ignorance? 
And yet they have the most abundant means of 
gratifying their passions and animal impulses, and, 
to a great extent, make a free and widely extended 
use of their opportunities. 



CHAPTER IV 



INDIVIDUAL RIGHTS 

The conclusions arrived at show individual 
morality under socialism in a very dark light. But 
we have still to add to the gloomy picture. We 
have thus far spoken only of actions regarding 
self, and found that socialist ethics places them out- 
side the sphere of morality. But individual con- 
duct also comprises actions which regard others, in 
so far as they are independent of us, or do not 
form with us a social organism. Has socialist ethics 
any precepts to which such actions are subject? 
As to our conduct regarding those not organically 
united with us, Kautsky answers clearly in the nega- 
tive. The reason he alleges for his contention is 
that during the struggle of existence the social in- 
stinct holds good as a moral law only in the inter- 
course with members of our own social organiza- 
tion. 

"The man who is not a member of the same so- 
ciety becomes a direct enemy. The social impulses 
do not only not hold good for him, but directly 
against him. The stronger they are, the better does 
the tribe hold together against the common foe, 
so much the more energetically do they fight the 
latter. The social virtues, mutual help, sacrifice, 

135 



136 



The Ethics of Individual Life 



love of truth, etc., apply only to fellow tribesmen, 
not to the members of another organization."* 

This doctrine as expounded in Kautsky's "Ethics 
and Materialist Conception of History" is not 
altogether new. He had set it forth in the "Neue 
Zeit," where on Oct. 3, 1903, he said in an article: 

"One of the most important duties is that of 
truthfulness to comrades, towards enemies this 
duty was never considered binding." 

At that time much resentment was excited 
against him, as he himself relates, because his 
"statement was interpreted as if he had attempted 
to establish a special social democratic principle in 
opposition to the principles of the eternal moral 
law which commands unconditional truthfulness to 
all men." Whether this interpretation was right 
or wrong, we may judge from the well-attested 
fact that in a socialist meeting at Hamburg a mo- 
tion made to disavow Kautsky's proposition was 
lost.f 

Consequently until the future society, embracing 
all civilized nations, shall be established on earth, 
all those actions which regard members of another 
than our own social organization are beyond the 
control of the moral law. Nor are there in the 
present civil order any duties toward the possess- 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, pp. 156, 
157. 

f Ibid. p. 157. Der Sozialdemocrat Hat das Wort. By Dr. 
Engelbert Kaeser. 3rd Edition. Freiburg 1905. p. 190. Stim- 
men aus Maria Laach. 1906. Heft. iv. p. 380. 



Individual R igh ts 



137 



ing classes, the capitalists, for these, too, must be 
looked at by socialists as enemies; not as members, 
but as a cancer of the social organism which must 
be eliminated for the benefit of the whole. 

Kautsky's principle reaches still farther in its 
applications. There are actions which though 
they regard others who are socially united with us, 
still have reference to them not as members of our 
own organization, but under the altogether indi- 
vidual aspects of their private and personal life, 
freedom and activity. How are actions of this 
kind to be regulated? Evidently not by the social 
instinct and regard to social well-being, because 
they are outside the social sphere. Their rule or 
standard is the consideration of man's individual 
dignity and personality. They are consequently, 
according to socialist utilitarianism, likewise ex- 
empt from moral precepts and lie beyond the boun- 
daries of morality. Undoubtedly Bebel looks in 
this light upon the sexual relations. 

The question of duties suggests the question of 
rights, for rights are inseparably bound up with 
duties. Duties confer on those on whom they are 
imposed the right of fulfilling them, and rights, 
while they give their subject or possessor the 
power of claiming things as his own, lay others un- 
der the inviolable obligation of respecting his de- 
mands. Thus correlated and connected, rights and 
duties constitute the sacred order of justice, than 
which there is none more necessary for the enjoy- 



138 The Ethics of Individual Life 

ment of peace and the harmony of freedom. Marx 
himself has openly acknowledged the connection of 
rights and duties. The declaration of principles 
put forth by the "International Workingmen's As- 
sociation" in 1864, in the words of Marx and 
Engels, contained the clause: "No rights without 
duties, no duties without rights." 

Bearing in mind this relation between rights and 
duties, we are compelled to put the question: Do 
socialists, after they have denied individual duties, 
recognize individual rights? In other words, do 
they admit rights conferred not only on bodies 
politic, but also on individuals, or do they recog- 
nize an order of justice existing not only among 
the members of society as such, but also among in- 
dividuals, guaranteeing their personal life, free- 
dom, and property? 

Putting this question we do not mean to ask 
whether there are positive rights which have been 
created by human authority for the benefit of in- 
dividuals and, therefore, may be abolished by it 
again, but whether there are natural rights, neces- 
sary and universal, which are prior to positive en- 
actments, as the individual is prior to society. For 
when natural duties have been negatived, the ex- 
istence also of natural rights must be questioned. 

There are socialists who directly and emphat- 
ically deny natural rights to individuals. R. Rives 
La Monte stanchly affirms: 

"It must be confessed that the revolutionary 



Individual Rights 



139 



worker has absolutely no respect for natural rights, 
including the right of property as such."* 

Austin Lewis likewise is of the opinion that so- 
cialists must deny individual property rights and 
assigns as the reason the workingman's insuffi- 
ciency for individual existence, independently of 
association. 

"It (the working class) has no interest in the 
theory which recognizes the power of the indi- 
vidual to make individual contracts. Its members 
are helpless when they come to make contracts as 
individuals. They are powerless, except as mem- 
bers of organized groups, into which they have 
been forced not because of any wisdom or fore- 
sight on their part, but because their work has 
thrown them pell-mell into factories and work- 
shops where they have been compelled to asso- 
ciate. They have been obliged to develop a class 
consciousness and solidarity by reason of this 
association to which they are driven by the con- 
ditions under which they labor. . . . They 
have no interest in the maintenance of prop- 
erty rights, which the law recognizes, because they 
have no property. They simply possess their labor- 
force which they sell from day to day. The price 
which they obtain for that labor-force is not de- 
pendent on their strength or skill as individuals, 
generally speaking, but simply on the power of 
their associations, upon the strength which they 
*Socialism Positive and Negative, p. 164. 



140 



The Ethics of Individual Life 



are able to bring to bear on their employers by 
and through their organizations. The very nature 
of their work, moreover, is inimical to the indi- 
vidualistic idea. They labor not in their own 
strength, but by virtue of the strength of their 
associated fellows. Their product is not their 
own product but the product of their asso- 
ciated effort. The rewards of their toil are not 
the rewards of individual effort, but the terms 
which their associated strength has managed to 
wring from the possessors of the machine without 
which they are not able to earn a living. The own- 
ership of these by individuals, real or fictitious, in 
accordance with the laws of private property, upon 
which rests the present social structure, separates 
them from the ownership of themselves. They 
recognize in the legally established rights of pri- 
vate property, the force which deprives them of 
their own existence as individuals, for when they 
sell their labor power they sell themselves." 

"Hence as the philosophy underlying the present 
republic is a philosophy of individualism, so the 
philosophy underlying the revolutionary move- 
ment is one of association, a philosophy which has 
received the name Socialism."* 

Kautsky, going still farther, maintains that the 
individual man is in his whole nature dependent 
on society. 

"We have seen that the animal organism itself 

*Int. Soc. Rev. April 1907. pp. 617, 618. 



Individual Rights 



possesses all the organs which it requires for its 
own existence, while the human individual under 
the advanced division of labor cannot live by it- 
self without society — the Robinson Crusoes, who 
without any means produce everything for them- 
selves, are only to be found in children's story 
books and scientific works of Bourgeois economists 
who believe that the best way to discover the laws 
of society is to completely ignore it. Man is in 
his whole nature dependent on society, it rules him, 
only through the peculiar nature of this is he to be 
understood."* 

If the individual man is insufficient to live and 
to act by himself, if in his whole nature he is de- 
pendent on society, he can no longer be considered 
a person; and if he is no person, he can not be a 
subject of rights. 

Lafargue regards the order of justice as a merely 
human institution enacted by positive laws of the 
capitalistic state. As he sets it forth, the idea of 
justice is ultimately founded on the sentiment of 
equality and the instinct of self-preservation. From 
the latter rise: first, the passion of vengeance, 
which "impels man and animal to resist when they 
receive a blow, and to respond to it mechanically, 
if fear does not put them to flight"; and, secondly, 
the prehensile instinct "which impels the savage 
man like the animal, his ancestor, to take possession 
of the objects he needs." Instinct and passion, how- 

*Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, p. 132. 



142 



The Ethics of Individual Life 



ever, need to be curbed. Vengeance was repressed 
and regulated by the law of retaliation, and thus 
rose in the brains of men the idea of retributive 
justice, "which has for its mission to proportion as 
exactly as possible the compensation for damage." 
The subjection of the prehensile instinct, which en- 
genders the idea of distributive justice, was ef- 
fected by property with the help of law and re- 
ligion. But the right of property went too far in 
its action ; it substituted itself for man, set aside the 
prehensile instinct and established inequalities. 
Thus it came to pass that justice destroyed the 
equalitarian spirit and sanctioned the enslavement 
of man. 

Justice, which thus grew up in society based on 
private property, shall disappear again in the so- 
cialist commonwealth, the ideal of social organiza- 
tion. As Lafargue says: 

"The Communist Revolution, by suppressing 
private property and giving 'to all the same things' 
will emancipate man and will bring to life the 
equalitarian spirit. Then the ideas of justice, 
which have haunted human heads since the estab- 
lishment of private property, will vanish — the 
most frightful nightmare which ever tortured sad 
civilized humanity."* 

The denial of natural individual rights by the 
authors just quoted is a necessary consequence of 
the principles fundamental to socialist ethics. 
^Social and Philosophical Studies, pp. 92-134. 



Individual Rights 



143 



It follows logically from the absence of indi- 
vidual duties; for where there are rfghts there are 
also duties, owing to the necessary connection be- 
tween the former and the latter; it follows from 
the admission of the social instinct as the natural 
moral law and of social welfare as man's ultimate 
end, for neither the one nor the other can be the 
basis of such individual freedom and independence 
as are guaranteed by rights; it follows from the 
nature of right itself, which is essentially a moral 
power, whereas socialism as a materialistic theory 
knows of no other than physical laws and forces; 
it follows from the denial of necessary and un- 
changeable truths and principles, laws and institu- 
tions, a denial necessarily implied in evolutionary 
philosophy and in particular in the materialistic- 
dialectic method embraced by socialism. 

But for all that natural rights are claimed for 
the workingman by socialists not only individually 
and privately, in their writings and speeches, but 
also collectively and publicly in their platforms 
and programs. The declaration of principles is- 
sued by the International Workingmen's Associa- 
tion in 1864 contains the following paragraph: 

"The first International Labor Congress de- 
clares that the International Workingmen's Asso- 
ciation and all societies and individuals belonging 
to it recognize truth, right and morality as the 
basis of their conduct toward one another and their 
fellowmen without respect to color, creed or na- 



144 



The Ethics of Individual Life 



tionality. This congress regards it as the duty of 
man to demand the rights of a man and citizen, 
not only for himself, but for everyone who does 
his duty. No rights without duties, and no duties 
without rights." 

The "Worker," in its issue of Aug. 17, 1907, 
remarks that this declaration of principles has 
formed the backbone, the basic timber, as it were, 
of nearly every socialist platform that has since 
been penned. In fact, all programs adopted by so- 
cialist conventions, in the strongest possible terms, 
claim rights for every individual man indepen- 
dently of any positive law : the right to live and to 
exist, the right to acquire the means of existence, 
the right for all of equal opportunities to develop, 
and above all the right to the product of one's own 
labor. 

Marx, the founder of scientific socialism, is also 
the stanchest defender of the individual worker; 
he most enthusiastically raises his voice for justice 
and thunders against the injustice of capitalism. 
His words re-echo to this day in nearly all 
pamphlets and books edited by socialist writers, 
in nearly every speech or harangue delivered from 
a socialist platform. 

Nor is this assertion of rights merely incidental 
to socialism ; it is, we might say, its vital principle. 
Without it the whole socialist movement would 
have no life and vigor, nay, not even a reason for 
existence; it could neither start, nor progress and 



Individual Rights 



145 



increase, nor would it have a definite goal and pur- 
pose. 

Here we have the affirmation at once and the 
negation of natural rights owned by individual 
man, both of them necessary and legitimate conclu- 
sions from principles fundamental to modern so- 
cialism. We must leave the reconciliation of these 
contradictories to socialist philosophers. They may 
perhaps succeed in bringing it about by their Hege- 
lian dialectics, according to which being and not 
being are identical. In accordance with the rules 
of common Logic we find a reconciliation utterly 
impossible. Nor is there an irreconcilable contra- 
diction only in conclusions — there is one also in 
principles; for only contradictory premises can 
contain contradictory illations. This shows social- 
ist ethics at its worst, at least as far as its doctrine 
on individual duties is concerned — a maze of 
contradictions from its first principles down to its 
last conclusions. 



PART III 
Ethics of the Family 



CHAPTER I 

THE FAMILY BEFORE THE TIME OF CIVILIZATION 



Section I 

The Idea of Society 

Since man is naturally constituted a social be- 
ing, societies of various kinds have always existed 
in the human race. Two of these, however, de- 
serve our special attention both on account of their 
universality and of their origin. For they are so 
general and widely extended, that they embrace all 
men and are found in all places, among all nations, 
and in all ages ; and, for this very reason, they can 
be so little considered as human inventions, that 
their origin must ultimately be traced back to na- 
ture itself. One of these is the family, in which we 
are brought into existence, attain our first develop- 
ment, and are provided with the means conducive 
to the sustenance of our daily life and the satis- 
faction of our ordinary and immediate needs. The 
other is the State, which maintains peace, order, 

146 



The Family Before Civilization 147 

and justice among the families and furnishes them 
the external means which are necessary for happi- 
ness during their earthly existence, yet which can 
not be attained by their unassisted activity. 

According to the old theistic teachings a society, 
taken in its strict sense, is a lasting union of several 
or many persons for the purpose of obtaining a 
common end by the use of common means. Such a 
society essentially needs a bond which, notwith- 
standing the individual freedom and divergent ten- 
dencies of its members, firmly holds them together 
so as to give to their union and co-operation 
steadiness and consistency. Since, however, the 
union of free wills is moral and spiritual, the bond 
uniting them can not be merely physical or ma- 
terial, but must be of a moral nature, laying them 
under such necessity as will not destroy their free- 
dom. Accordingly, it consists in mutual rights and 
obligations; in the right on the part of the com- 
munity to demand from the members co-operation, 
as far as it is necessary for the attainment of the 
common end, and in the corresponding obligation 
on the part of the members to comply with this 
imperative demand ; and, vice versa, in the right of 
the members to require a proportionate share in 
the common good achieved by co-operation, and a 
strict obligation on the part of the community to 
deal with them accordingly. It is by such rights 
and obligations that society is intrinsically consti- 
tuted and established on a firm and imperishable 



148 



Ethics of the Family 



basis. There is, moreover, an authority needed, 
which constantly directs and harmonizes co-opera- 
tion, adapts it to the common end, determines the 
means to be used at given times, distributes the 
offices and functions to be performed, stirs up or 
compels the members to activity and obliges them 
to sacrifice personal for public interests. As in the 
animal body there are individual nerve centers 
which stimulate the organs to activity and regulate 
their operations, and a general center which co- 
ordinates and unifies the divers functions, so in the 
social organism there must be a head to effect unity 
among the members and harmony throughout their 
entire activity. 

This holds good in general of all societies, 
whether they be instituted by nature and made a 
necessity for the human race, or be freely entered 
into and framed by men. In the former, however, 
both the juridical relations constituting the bond 
of union and the authority directing the social co- 
operation are of a higher order. They are estab- 
lished by God Himself, as the author of nature, 
through an inviolable, necessary, and unchangeable 
law. Such societies are the family and the State. 

Socialist philosophy must regard society so con- 
stituted as an impossibility, though it can not re- 
ject its definition as commonly given and received 
since olden times. For it admits no divine Creator 
of human nature, no divine Founder of a social 
union, no natural law binding men in conscience, 



The Family Before Civilization 149 

no authority divinely established, no social rights 
and duties prior to associations founded by men 
themselves. Society, according to it, is ultimately 
founded on the insufficiency of individual animals 
and men, comes into existence in the struggle for 
existence by the survival of the fittest, is held to- 
gether by the social instinct as its bond, and is grad- 
ually developed and organized under the influence 
of economic conditions and social needs. 

Under these presuppositions it is difficult to con- 
ceive how socialism can build up human society, 
domestic and civil, on a solid and rational basis. 
The members which constitute society are re- 
garded by socialists either as deprived of indi- 
vidual rights, because they can have no existence 
unless organically united, or as individually free 
and independent. In the former supposition so- 
ciety is the work of nature itself, or a necessary re- 
sult of circumstances and conditions, developed in 
the course of history. But according to socialist 
philosophy nature is but self-existent matter eter- 
nally evolving, and the historical development of 
mankind, because it is not under the direction of a 
Divine Providence, constitutes but the last stage of 
the necessary world-process governed by universal 
physical laws. Hence society is not framed with 
wisdom and intelligence, nor does it rest on any 
laws of reason as its bond of union. It exists and 
is held together by physical necessity, at least dur- 
ing certain periods, but has no rational basis. 



150 



Ethics of the Family 



On the supposition — whether consistently made 
or not, we do not here inquire — that the members 
constituting society are persons endowed with in- 
dividual rights, free and independent, it follows 
that they must frame and build up the social body 
by their own will and determination ; for nobody is 
physically necessitated to enter into union with his 
fellow-men, and nobody is compelled to give more 
assistance to others than he is willing to render, and 
when they have freely built up society, they may 
again dissolve it at their pleasure. There is no law 
above them or in them that could restrain their su- 
preme and autonomous will from undoing its own 
acts or oblige them to keep a promise they have 
given or fulfil a contract they have agreed upon. 
But this granted, society would be destitute of any 
solid basis. 

One question remains yet to be solved, that of 
authority and governmental power. Will socialists 
deny its necessity? If so, they either do away with 
the unity of social co-operation for a common end, 
or suppose that the social instinct, fully developed 
and strengthened under normal conditions, will 
with irresistible necessity prompt all the members 
of society to harmonious action. This latter idea 
seems to be espoused by Kautsky. 

If, however, the necessity of authority is ad- 
mitted, whence is it to be derived? No God, no 
Creator and Supreme Lord being acknowledged, 
it must be a creation of man himself. Considered 



The Family Before Civilization 151 

as such it can not be anything else than the will 
of the majority of the members constituting so- 
ciety. But this collective will of the majority, 
supreme and sovereign as it is, turns out to 
be an absolute tyrant. With no power to bind 
any one in conscience or lay him under moral 
obligation, it can compel the members of so- 
ciety to obedience only by sheer physical force or 
by the infliction of harm and disgrace through 
public opinion. Yet though thus restricted in one 
way, it is absolute and unlimited in another respect. 
For, being subject to no higher law and power, it 
may command or forbid whatever it pleases and 
compel the dissenting minority to obedience by 
whatever violence it chooses; it may exercise com- 
pulsion of whatever kind, and yet not be guilty of 
oppression. What is of no less importance, this 
will itself of the majority can never give unity 7 and 
stability to society, since it changes according as 
contending parties — now the one and now the other 
— hold the ascendency. Nor can it consolidate 
peace and order; for as it rises out of conten- 
tion and struggle, in which all possible methods, 
honest and dishonest, are alike employed, it justi- 
fies revolution when raised to power, and calls 
forth ever new disturbances when exercising its 
rule. 

In many respects, then, socialist philosophy 
proves insufficient to build up a solid basis for 
social life. It is wanting in essential elements; and 



152 Ethics of the Family 

as we proceed in the ethics of particular societies, 
we shall notice the consequences of its inadequacy 
at every step. 

Section II 
The Idea of the Family 

The family, according to theistic views, is an 
organic or compound society made up of two ele- 
mentary societies, the conjugal and the parental. 
The former is defined as the union of male and fe- 
male, involving their living together in undivided 
intercourse, or more precisely, as the lasting union 
of two persons, male and female, for the purpose 
of propagating and educating the human kind. 
The parental society is the lasting union of parents 
and offspring in behalf of education. Both these 
societies are instituted by nature, because propaga- 
tion and education naturally need the social co- 
operation of husband and wife, father and mother, 
and therefore are constituted and governed by nat- 
ural rights and obligations. 

The object of conjugal society or marriage re- 
quires its indissolubility; the equal personal dig- 
nity of its members postulates their equality in es- 
sential rights; the nature of their union implies 
mutual love, friendship, and faithfulness; the 
unity and harmony of action necessary for the 
achievement of the common end demands obedi- 



The Family Before Civilization 153 

ence of the wife to the husband, not like that of a 
slave to the master, but rather like that of a mate 
to a friend and of a member to the head. 

Parents are under the strict obligation, laid on 
them directly by the Author of nature, to impart to 
their children physical, intellectual, and moral edu- 
cation, and to devote their entire energy to the ac- 
complishment of this task; but they are at the same 
time clothed with sacred and inviolable authority 
over them. 

Christianity has not only enhanced the sacred- 
ness of marriage, but has also strengthened its in- 
dissolubility, ennobled the motives for mutual love 
between husband and wife, sustained and defended 
the dignity and liberty of the latter, and con- 
demned the overbearing arbitrariness of the former 
as it prevailed in pagan antiquity. It likewise 
urges parents by laws and commandments to take 
care of the education of their children, elevates 
and sanctifies their natural love for their off- 
spring, guides them in training it in moral and 
civic virtues, and heightens their influence and 
authority. 

In accordance with socialist teachings, the 
family is not an institution of nature, but the out- 
come of economic conditions prevailing in the suc- 
cessive periods of history. It does not commence 
with the existence of the human race, but develops 
gradually and reaches its ultimate and ideal per- 
fection in the co-operative commonwealth; nor is 



154 



Ethics of the Family 



it subject to any higher authority and unchange- 
able law, but depends for its stability on property 
relations and the mutual inclination of husband 
and wife. 

The origin and evolution of the family, and of 
marriage in particular, is related and critically dis- 
cussed chiefly in Engels' work "The Origin of the 
Family, Private Property and the State" (edited 
first in 1884, translated into English by E. Unter- 
mann, and published by C. H. Kerr and Company, 
in Chicago, 1902) . Engels bases his conclusions on 
Louis Morgan's "Ancient Society" and on critical 
notes left by Karl Marx. He himself says in the 
preface : 

"The following chapters are, in a certain sense, 
executing a bequest. It was no less a man than 
Karl Marx who had reserved to himself the 
privilege of displaying the results of Morgan's 
investigations in connection with his own material- 
istic conception of history — which I might call 
ours within certain limits. He wished thus to elu- 
cidate the full meaning of this conception. For in 
America Morgan had, in a manner, discovered a 
new materialistic conception of history, originated 
by Marx forty years ago. In comparing barbarism 
and civilization, he had arrived, in the main, at the 
same results as Marx. . . . My work can offer 
only a meager substitute for that which my de- 
parted friend was not destined to accomplish. But 
in his copious extracts from Morgan, I have 



The Family Before Civilization 155 



critical notes which I herewith reproduce as fully 
as feasible."* 

Socialist writers and speakers unanimously rec- 
ommend this book of Engels as the classical work, 
from which the genuine teachings of socialism 
must be learned. According to a remark of the 
publisher, it is one of the most notable works of 
the man who shares with Marx the honor of being 
the first to formulate the principles of socialism, a 
work which no student of social science can afford 
to overlook; according to the "Appeal to Reason," 
it is one of the textbooks from which to gain the 
understanding of the socialist position on mar- 
riage; according to the "Comrade," it is a book 
that has long been regarded as one of the "classics" 
of socialist philosophical literature ;f according to 
the "International Socialist Review," it is a sup- 
plement to Marx's "Capital," one of the two or 
three great socialist classics that must find a place 
in the library of every one who hopes to master 
the real fundamental philosophy underlying 
socialism.:}: 

Bebel's "Woman" also rests mainly on Morgan's 
work as explained and supplemented by Engels. 
Bebel himself says : 

"A material lifting of the veil, formerly spread 

*The Origin of the Family, Private Property and the State. 
Preface, p. 9. 

fSee Goldstein. Socialism. Boston 1903. pp. 190-192. 
ilnt. Soc. Rev. Oct. 1902. p. 248. 



Ethics of the Family 



over the history of the development of our race, 
has been effected through the investigations made, 
since Bachofen, by a considerable number of sci- 
entists, like Tylor, MacLennan, Lubbock and 
others. Prominently among the men who joined 
these was Morgan, with his fundamental work, 
that Frederick Engels further substantiated and 
supplemented with a series of historical facts, 
economic and politic in their nature, and that, more 
recently, has been partly confirmed and partly rec- 
tified by Cunow. By means of these expositions — 
especially as clearly and lucidly presented by 
Frederick Engels, in his support of Morgan's ex- 
cellent and fundamental work — a mass of light is 
shed upon hitherto unintelligible, partly seem- 
ingly contradictor} 7 phenomena in the life of the 
races and tribes of both high and low degree of 
culture. Only now do we gain an insight into the 
structure that human society raised in the course 
of time. According thereto, our former views of 
marriage, the family, the community, the State, 
rested upon notions that were wholly false; so 
false that they turn out to be no better than a 
fancy-picture, wholly devoid of foundation in 
fact."* 

*Woman. pp. n, 12. 



The Family Before Civilization 157 



Section III 
The Primitive Forms of the Family 

Engels and with him Bebel distinguish in the 
evolution of the family three epochs and, conse- 
quently, also three forms corresponding to the 
principal stages of human development. 

"We have," he says in a recapitulation, "three 
forms of the family corresponding in general to 
the three main stages of human development. For 
savagery group marriage, for barbarism the pair- 
ing family, for civilization monogamy supple- 
mented by adultery and prostitution. Between 
the pairing family and monogamy, in the higher 
stage of barbarism, the rule of man over female 
slaves and polygamy is inserted."* 

Savagery and the sexual relations under it are 
characterized by Engels as follows: Savagery is 
the time of predominating appropriation of fin- 
ished natural products, human ingenuity mainly 
inventing tools in assisting this appropriation. Its 
lowest stage is the prehistoric time, when human 
beings, living on trees and feeding on fruits, still 
dwelt in their original habitation, the tropical and 
subtropical forests, and began to form articulated 
speech. Its highest stage is marked with the 
invention of bow and arrow, making venison a 
regular part of daily fare, and with the beginnings 
*The Origin of the Family, etc. p. 90. 



158 



Ethics of the Family 



of village settlements and control of food pro- 
duction.* 

The first and original form of the family cor- 
responding to savagery, at the time of transition 
from animal to man, was the group family, that is 
the family comprising a whole tribe, in which every 
woman belonged to every man, and every man to 
every woman; or the group marriage, in which 
whole groups of men and whole groups of women 
belonged to one another. Sexual intercourse was 
then absolutely unrestricted within the same tribe 
or group. f 

However, as evolution proceeded, one restric- 
tion after the other was introduced. First ancestors 
and descendants were excluded from the rights and 
duties of marriage, while "brothers and sisters, 
male and female cousins of the first, second and 
more remote grades, were all mutually brothers 
and sisters and for this very reason mutual hus- 
bands and wives." The sexual relations thus estab- 
lished constituted the Consanguine family. Of this 
as well as the group family even the crudest na- 
tions of history do not furnish any proof, but the 
forms of marriage known to us point to them as 
preparatory stages of development.^ 

The next restriction introduced in the course 
of time excluded from sexual intercourse brothers 

*The Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 27, 28, 34. 
flbid. pp. 42, 43- 
tlbid. pp. 44, 45- 



The Family Before Civilization 159 



and sisters on the mother's side, and later on also 
male and female cousins of the second and still re- 
moter grades. This exclusion was made permanent 
by natural selection. In this or a similar manner 
developed that form which Morgan styles the 
Punaluan family. "Its fundamental characteristic 
was mutual community of husbands and wives 
within a given family with the exclusion of the 
natural brothers or sisters first, and of the more 
remote grades later."* 

"In all forms of the group family it is uncertain 
who is the father of a child, but certain who is the 
mother." "Descent, therefore, can only be traced 
on the mother's side, and hence only female 
lineage can be acknowledged." This exclusive 
recognition of descent from the female line and 
the hereditary relations therefrom arising consti- 
tute the "maternal law." The Punaluan family 
group gave rise to the gens, that is, to a defi- 
nite circle of consanguineous relatives of female 
lineage who were not permitted to marry one 
another.f 

Engels can not find anything shocking or im- 
moral in the unrestricted sexual intercourse of the 
group family. For, as he thinks, it was necessary 
for the formation of large and permanent groups, 
in which alone the transformation from beast to 
man could be accomplished; it was the original 

*Ibid. pp. 46, 48. 
flbid. pp. 49, 50. 



i6o 



Ethics of the Family 



form of the family and it is still in practice, and 
meant nothing but the absence of restrictions, in- 
vented later on by jealousy and introduced by cus- 
tom. Incest is in his eyes nothing but such a later 
invention.* 

Bebel likewise clears these sexual relations from 
immorality. He says in his "Woman" : 

"The form under which the relations of the 
sexes appear and the situation of the family is 
raised, depends rather upon the social conditions, 
upon the manner in which man controls his subsist- 
ence. The form changes with the changed degree 
of culture at each given period." 

"The study of primitive history leaves now no 
room for doubt that, at the lowest grades of hu- 
man development, the relations of the sexes is 
totally different from that of latter times, and that 
a state of things resulted therefrom, which, looked 
at with modern eyes, appears as monstrous, and as 
a sink of immorality. Nevertheless, as each social 
stage of human development has its own condi- 
tions of production, so likewise has each its own 
code of morals, which is but the reflection of the 
social condition. That is moral which is usage, and 
that, in turn, is usage which corresponds with the 
innermost being, i.e., the needs of a given 
period."f 

Engels, relying on Morgan's discoveries, re- 

*The Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 42-44. 
fWoman. p. 16. 



The Family Before Civilization 161 

lates the subsequent evolution of the family as fol- 
lows : 

Whilst the group marriage attained its highest 
development in the Punaluan family, savagery 
reached its upper limit and began to evolve into 
barbarism. Barbarism is "the time of acquiring the 
knowledge of cattle raising, of agriculture and of 
new methods of increasing the productivity of na- 
ture by human agency." It begins with the intro- 
duction of the art of pottery, and ends with the 
melting of iron ore and the merging into civiliza- 
tion by the invention of letter script and its utiliza- 
tion for writing records. 

In its last stage we find the Greek heroes, the 
Italian tribes before the foundation of Rome, 
the Germans of Tacitus, the Norsemen of the 
Viking age.* 

From the economic conditions of barbarism 
grew out the pairing family. To quote Engels : 

U A certain pairing for a longer or shorter term 
took place even during the group marriage or still 
earlier. A man had his principal wife among many 
women and he was her principal husband among 
others. Such a habitual pairing would gain ground 
the more the gens developed and the more numer- 
ous the classes of 'brothers and sisters 7 became who 
were not permitted to marry one another. . . . 
By this increasing complication of marriage re- 
strictions, group marriage became more and more 
*The Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 32-35. 



l62 



Ethics of the Family 



impossible; it was displaced by the pairing 
family."* 

"The development of the family, then," as 
Engels infers, "was founded on the continual con- 
traction of the circle, originally comprising the 
whole tribe, within which marital intercourse be- 
tween both sexes was general. By the continual 
exclusion first of near, then of even remoter rela- 
tives, including finally even those who were simply 
related legally, all group marriage became impos- 
sible. At last one couple, temporarily and loosely 
united, remained, that molecule the dissolution of 
which puts an end to marriage. "f 

The traditional communistic housekeeping and 
supremacy of woman in the house still continued in 
the pairing family. 

"The pairing family, being too weak and too 
unstable to make an independent household neces- 
sary or even desirable, in no way dissolves the tra- 
ditional communistic way of housekeeping. But 
household communism implies the supremacy of 
women in the house as surely as exclusive recogni- 
tion of a natural mother and the consequent impos- 
sibility of identifying the natural father signify 
high esteem for women, i.e., mothers.":}: 

Owing to the rise of new economic and social 
conditions, the pairing family underwent changes 

*The Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 56, 57. 
flbid. pp. 58, 59- 
tlbid. p. 60. 



The Family Before Civilization 163 

which gradually led to the monogamous family, 
not in the countries of the New World, before its 
discovery and conquest by Europeans, but in the 
classical countries of the Old World. 

In the latter, the domestication of animals and 
the breeding of flocks had developed a hitherto 
unknown source of wealth and created entirely new 
social conditions. 

With their herds of horses, camels, donkeys, 
cattle, sheep, goats, and hogs, the advancing no- 
madic nations had acquired possessions demanding 
only the most crude attention and care, in order to 
make them propagate themselves in ever-increas- 
ing number and yield the most abundant store of 
milk and meat. All former means of obtaining 
food were now forced to the background. Hunt- 
ing, once a necessity, now became a sport. 

Moreover, at this time also slavery was intro- 
duced.* 

But who was the owner of this new wealth? 
"Undoubtedly," answers Engels, "it was originally 
the gens." Gradually, however, he goes on to ex- 
plain, it passed over first into the possession of the 
family and then into the ownership of the natural 
father as its chief. Under these new conditions he 
was placed at the side of the natural mother. 

"According to the division of labor in those 
times, the task of obtaining food and the tools 
necessary for this purpose fell to the share of the 
*The Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 66, 67. 



164 



Ethics of the Family 



man, hence he owned the latter and kept them in 
case of separation, as the woman did the house- 
hold goods. According to the social custom of that 
time, the man was also the owner of the new source 
of existence, the cattle, and later on the new labor 
power, the slaves." 

Still his children could not inherit his property; 
for according to the original custom only the gen- 
tile relatives were inheritable. But by the maternal 
law, that is, while descent was traced only by the 
female line, his own children did not belong to his 
gens, but to that of the mother. 

By the superior position, however, which he had 
acquired through his wealth, the man succeeded in 
abolishing the traditional law of inheritance. 

"In the measure of the increasing wealth, man's 
position in the family became superior to that of 
woman, and the desire arose to use his fortified po- 
sition for the purpose of overthrowing the tradi- 
tional law of inheritance in favor of his children. 
But this was not feasible as long as maternal law 
was valid. This law had to be abolished, and it 
was. This was by no means as difficult as it ap- 
pears to us to-day. . . . The simple resolution 
was sufficient, that henceforth the offspring of the 
male members should belong to the gens, while 
the children of the female members should be ex- 
cluded by transferring them to the gens of their 
father. This abolished the tracing of descent by 
female lineage and the maternal right of inher- 



The Family Before Civilization 165 



itance, and instituted descent by male lineage and 
the paternal right of inheritance. How and when 
this revolution was accomplished by the nations of 
the earth, we do not know. It belongs entirely to 
prehistoric times."* 

The introduction of paternal law changed the 
relations between the members of the family here- 
tofore existing. 

"The downfall of maternal law was the historic 
defeat of the female sex. The men seized the reins 
also in the house, the women were stripped of their 
dignity, enslaved, tools of men's lust, and mere 
machines for the generation of children." 

The first effect of the established supremacy of 
man was the organization of a certain number of 
free and unfree persons into one family, under the 
paternal authority of the head of the family. The 
ideal type of this form of household was the 
Roman family, which designated a "new social 
organism the head of which had a wife, children, 
and a number of slaves under his paternal author- 
ity and according to Roman law the right of life 
and death over all of them." 

"In order to secure the faithfulness of the wife, 
and hence the reliability of paternal lineage, the 
women are delivered absolutely into the power of 
the men; in killing his wife, the husband simply ex- 
ercises his right. "f 

*The Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 67-69. 
flbid. pp. 70, 71. 



i66 



Ethics of the Family 



This form of the family shows the transition 
from the pairing family to monogamy. 

Bebel avers the same organization of the group 
and pairing family as Engels : promiscuity, ma- 
ternal law, supremacy of woman, community of 
property and of women at first, later on restrictions 
of sexual intercourse, introduction of private prop- 
erty, the establishment of the paternal law and the 
absolute rule of man.* 

He speaks in particular with great warmth of 
the supremacy of woman. 

"In the days (of the Punaluan Family) { matri- 
monium' and not 'patrimonium,' 'materfamilias' 
and not 'paterfamilias,' were the terms used; and 
the native land is called the 'dear motherland.' As 
with the previous family-forms, so did the gens 
rest upon the community of property, and had a 
communistic system of household. The woman is 
the real guide and leader of this family commun- 
ity; hence she enjoys a high degree of respect, in 
the house as well as in the affairs of the family 
community concerning the tribe. She is judge and 
adjuster of disputes, and frequently performs the 
ceremonies of religion as priestess. The frequent 
appearance of Queens and Princesses in antiquity, 
their controlling influence, even there where their 
sons reigned, for instance, in the history of Egypt, 
are results of the mother-right. Mythology, at that 
epoch, assumes predominantly female characters: 
*Woman. pp. 14-25. 



The Family Before Civilization 167 



Astarte, Ceres, Demeter, Latona, Isis, Frizza, 
Freia, Gerdha, etc. Woman is considered invi- 
olable; matricide is the blackest of all crimes: it 
summons all men to retribution. The blood-feud is 
the common concern of all the men of the tribe; 
each is obliged to avenge the wrong done to a 
member of the family community by the members 
of another tribe. In defence of the women the 
men are spurred to the highest valor. Thus did the 
effects of the mother-right, gyneocracy, manifest 
themselves in all the relations of life among the 
peoples of antiquity — among the Babylonians, the 
Assyrians, the Egyptians, the Greeks, before the 
times of the Heroes; among the peoples of Italy, 
before the founding of Rome; among the Scythi- 
ans, the Gauls, the Iberians and Cantabrians, the 
Germans of Tacitus, etc. Woman, at that time, 
takes in the family and in public life a position such 
as she has never since taken. Along these lines, 
says Tacitus in his 'Germania' : 'They (the Ger- 
mans) even suppose somewhat of sanctity and 
prescience to be inherent in the female sex; and, 
therefore, neither despise their counsels, nor dis- 
regard their responses.' "* 

"With the rule of private property, the subjec- 
tion of woman to man, her bondage, was sealed. 
Then came the time of disregard, even of contempt 
for woman. 

"The reign of the mother-right implied com- 
* Woman, p. 24. 



i68 



Ethics of the Family 



munism; equality for all; the rise of the father-right 
implied the reign of private property, and, with it, 
the oppression and enslavement of woman."* 

Engels' and Bebel's statements re-echo in all 
socialist literature, when the origin and evolution 
of the family is spoken of, or the greatness of the 
modern woman is rested on an historical basis. 

Paul Lafargue infers the practice of incest in 
primitive times from ancient mythology and relig- 
ious customs. f 

Loria accounts for the transition from primitive 
promiscuity to the earliest family-forms by the 
necessity of organized labor, and for the abolition 
of the mother law by the dependence of woman on 
the labor of man in procuring her subsistence. 

"The transition from primitive promiscuity to 
that earliest form of familial aggregation, known 
as the maternal family, was brought about by an 
increase of population and the consequent need of 
augmenting the means of subsistence through or- 
ganized co-operative labor. This necessity of 
forming an association of labor, however imper- 
fect, inspired in the mind of the primitive man the 
idea of uniting into distinct groups individuals, 
who had up to this time been in the habit of wan- 
dering at will from place to place. These groups 
were constituted, and at the same time circum- 

*Woman. p. 30. 

fSocial and Philosophical Studies. Translated by Chas. H. 
Kerr. Chicago 1906. p. 58. 



The Family Before Civilization 169 



scribed, by forbidding intermarriage among their 
members, and by compelling the women of each 
group to select their husbands from a foreign 
group. Within the familial clans thus constituted, 
the children always belonged to the clan of the 
mother, and consequently to a different clan from 
that of the father. 

"In this way individuals belonging to different 
clans, but all collected around the same maternal 
head, were able to establish a primitive labor asso- 
ciation. The maternal family was thus the first 
means employed to concentrate the labor of several 
individuals upon a definite territory." 

But this prehistoric method of associating labor 
soon gave evidence of multiple defects. It failed to 
produce unity and harmony among men belonging 
to different clans and owing obedience to different 
powers. 

Moreover, when subsistence could no longer be 
procured except by labor, the younger and weaker 
members of the family, finding it impossible to pro- 
duce enough for their needs, were forced to recog- 
nize that their very life depended upon the labor 
of the older and stronger members of the group. 
Man, thus, naturally acquired an economic and 
therewith also a legal power over wife and chil- 
dren, who owed to him their existence. Hence- 
forward the supervision of the family became the 
privilege of the father. The husband, having ob- 
tained a despotic right, now prevented his wife 



170 Ethics of the Family 



from having any further intercourse with other 
men and subjected her to his authority in all acts 
of her life. Over his children likewise the father 
exercised a limitless patria potestas. 

"Now the sovereignty exercised by the father 
over the members of his family is in reality but an 
extension of the prevailing economic relation be- 
tween property and labor, and for this reason it 
is bound to become modified as this economic anti- 
thesis is softened."* 

May Wood Simons writes of the prehistoric 
woman : 

"She stood at one time at the head of the matri- 
archal family and from her her children took their 
names and through her reckoned their descent." 

"With the introduction of private property the 
headship of the family was transferred from the 
mother to the father. This marked the first great 
economic and social change for woman. It meant 
that she now became a secluded being, entirely de- 
pendent on man for subsistence, and since her life 
in the open air was gone, she was no longer his 
physical equal. She ceased to be actively engaged 
in industry, and child-bearing was henceforth her 
chief occupation. The opinion, therefore, began to 
prevail that this was her sole function to perform 
in society."f 

With great enthusiasm W. A. Clark sounds the 

^Economic Foundations of Society, pp. 87-89. 

f Woman and the Social Problem. Chicago 1899. pp. 78. 



The Family Before Civilization 171 



praises of early womanhood in a booklet entitled 
"Woman, Man and Poverty." We read: 

"The absolute truth about woman is almost unbe- 
lievable, but it must be met and honestly dealt with." 

"We now know something of the laws, customs 
and religions of early peoples. The records they 
left were made when women ruled at home, in re- 
ligion and in State. It was a form of society known 
as the Matriarchate, or Mother-rule. Its origin 
was due to the fact that still earlier peoples yielded 
to the mother the supreme control over her chil- 
dren. In the first state of primitive man, the re- 
lationship between father and child was not known; 
the right of the mother to her child was therefore 
most natural. Children took their mother's name; 
drew the first inspiration of humanity from 
Mother's Holy Love, and upon that was based the 
first conception of the family. The father, having 
no part in the family, remained a wanderer, leav- 
ing the mother in absolute control. This precedence 
of the mother extended to the primitive State, and 
indicated the form of religion. 

"Mother was the first deity, because woman was 
looked upon as the higher giver and sustainer of 
all life. The records show that where a god or 
goddess were worshipped together, they were 
mother and son, and the mother or goddess was in 
the prominent place."* 

*Woman, Man and Poverty. 2nd Edition. Kansas City, Mo. 
pp. 8. 9. 



172 



Ethics of the Family 



"From the records we learn that under the 
Mother- rule there was a free society; but as soon 
as man, by his superior animal strength, began to 
dominate over woman and her children, the germs 
of human slavery were sown. Furthermore, we 
learn that, since the Patriarchate, or man-rule be- 
gan, human life was counted for naught. Inno- 
cent babes have been sacrificed to appease what was 
supposed to be an angry god. As a matter of 
course, such a god was masculine, for under the 
Mother-rule no living sacrifice was made — lambs 
and doves were not slaughtered to pacify a blood- 
thirsty god. The god, who craved the blood of a 
creature he was said to have made, was not known 
until some man wanted to justify himself for hav- 
ing murdered a fellow-man."* 

The author professes adhesion to socialism in the 
last two sentences of the booklet when he says : 

"On investigation it will be seen that only 
through Socialism can we establish the economic 
independence of Woman, Man and Child. And 
that will be the end of exploitation, which is the 
father of poverty."! 

In these strange prehistoric discoveries, no less 
humiliating for man than flattering to woman, we 
are struck by one feature in particular. The real 
foundation of woman's divine pre-eminence and 

*Woman, Man and Poverty. 2nd Edition. Kansas City, Mo. 
pp. 12, 13. 
tlbid. p. 28. 



The Family Before Civilization 173 

native claim to authority is found to lie in primitive 
promiscuity, in her more or less restricted poly- 
andry at a time when the human race is said to 
have been scarcely yet above the level of its brute 
ancestors. Is it possible that in our enlightened era 
a decent woman could glory in such a title of 
nobility? 

But let us return to the further evolution of the 
family as related by Engels. 



CHAPTER II 



THE MONOGAMOUS FAMILY UNDER CIVILIZATION 



Section I 

The Origin of Monogamy 

The monogamous family developed from the 
pairing family during the transition from the 
lower to the higher stages of barbarism, though its 
final victory was delayed until the advent of civili- 
zation, the time when arts and manufactures were 
invented. Engels characterizes it by the following 
traits. 

"It is founded on the male supremacy for the 
pronounced purpose of children of indisputable pa- 
ternal lineage. ,, From the pairing family it is dis- 
tinguished u by far greater durability of wedlock, 
which can no longer be dissolved at the pleasure of 
either party. As a rule, it is only the man who can 
still dissolve it and cast off his wife." "The privi- 
lege of conjugal faithlessness remains sanctioned 
for men at least by custom and is more and more 
enjoyed with the increasing development of society. 
If the woman remembers the ancient sexual prac- 
tices and attempts to revive them, she is punished 
more severely than ever."* 
*Origin of the Family, etc. p. 75. 

174 



The Family Under Civilization 175 



The whole severity of this new form of the 
family, as Engels explains, confronts us in class- 
ical Greece. But even among the Greeks, the 
most developed nation of antiquity, monogamy is 
by no means the highest form of marriage. First 
of all, it was not the fruit of individual sex-love, 
but the outcome of economic and egoistic con- 
siderations. 

"Monogamy was the first form of the family 
not founded on natural, but on economic condi- 
tions, vvz. y the victory of private property over 
primitive and natural collectivism. Supremacy of 
the man in the family and generation of children 
that could be his offspring alone and were destined 
to be the heirs of his wealth — these were openly 
avowed to be the sole objects of monogamy. For 
the rest it was a burden to them, a duty to gods, 
the State and their own ancestors, a duty to be ful- 
filled and no more." 

Secondly, monogamy, as the subjugation of one 
sex by the other, was the proclamation of an an- 
tagonism between the sexes unknown in all pre- 
ceding history, the first class division and class op- 
pression. 

Thirdly, it was always attended by hetasrism, 
sexual intercourse of men with unmarried women 
outside the monogamous family, and adultery on 
the part of the wife; both remnants of the old sex- 
ual freedom.* 
*Ibid. pp. 79-82. 



176 Ethics of the Family 



Among the Romans and Germans monogamy 
had not that severe classic form which it had 
among the Greeks. When after the downfall of 
the Empire these two nations mixed, a "new mon- 
ogamy endowed male rule with a milder form and 
accorded to woman a position that was at least out- 
wardly far more respected and free than classical 
antiquity ever knew." u Not until now was there 
a possibility of developing from monogamy . . . 
the highest ethical progress we owe to it : the mod- 
ern individual sex-love, unknown to all previous 
ages."* 

Section II 
Modern Monogamy 

Still monogamy did not exclusively or even prin- 
cipally develop as mutual love of man and wife. 
Among all historically active, i.e., ruling classes, 
matrimony remained what it had been since the 
days of the pairing family — a conventional matter 
arranged by the parents. It remained such down to 
our days and was in consequence always attended 
by hetaerism and adultery. 

"In Catholic countries, the parents provide a fit- 
ting spouse for their son as of old, and the natural 
consequence is the full development of the contra- 
dictions inherent to monogamy: voluptuous hetaer- 
ism on the man's part, voluptuous adultery of the 

*Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 83, 84. 



The Family Under Civilization 177 



woman. Probably the Catholic Church has abol- 
ished divorce for the simple reason that it had 
come to the conclusion, there was as little help for 
adultery as for death." 

"In Protestant countries, again, it is the custom 
to give to the bourgeois son more or less liberty in 
choosing his mate. Hence a certain degree of love 
may be at the bottom of such marriages, and for 
the sake of propriety this is always assumed, quite 
in keeping with Protestant hypocrisy. In this case 
hetasrism is carried on less strenuously and adul- 
tery on the part of the women is not so frequent. 
But as human beings remain under any form of 
marriage what they were before marrying, and as 
the citizens of Protestant countries are mostly 
philistines, this Protestant monogamy on the aver- 
age of the best cases confines itself to a leaden 
ennui, labeled wedded bliss." 

"In both cases the marriage is influenced by the 
class environment of the participants, and in this 
respect it always remains conventional. This con- 
ventionalism often enough results in the most pro- 
nounced prostitution — sometimes of both parties — 
more commonly of the women. She is distin- 
guished from a courtesan only in that she does not 
offer her body for money by the hour like a com- 
modity, but sells it into slavery once for all."* 

*Ibid. pp. 85, 86. Does Engels so utterly ignore Catholic 
legislation on marriage? The Church regards marriage as 
essentially free and hence has for centuries made any previous 



i 7 8 



Ethics of the Family 



In the communist manifesto Marx and Engels 
characterize the present marriage, or, as they call 
it, the bourgeois marriage, as a system of com- 
munity of wives, of prostitution, public and pri- 
vate. We read in Part II. : 

"The bourgeois sees in his wife a mere instru- 
ment of production. He hears that the instruments 
of production are to be exploited in common, and, 
naturally, can come to no other conclusion than the 
lot of being common to all will likewise fall to the 
women." 

"Bourgeois marriage is in reality a system of 
wives in common, and thus, at the most, what the 
Communists might possibly be reproached with, is 
that they desire to introduce, in substitution for a 
hypocritically concealed, an openly legalized com- 
munity of women. For the rest it is self-evident 
that the abolition of the present system of produc- 
tion must bring with it the abolition of the com- 
munity of women springing from that system: i.e., 
prostitution both public and private." 

Bebel, in his "Woman," has set to himself the 
special task of demonstrating at full length the im- 
morality of modern monogamy. However drastic 
and indelicate his language may be, we can not 
leave his positions and arguments unstated, for they 

intimidation, even by parents, an annulling impediment. Again, 
what proof has he that hetserism and adultery are rampant 
among Catholics, even more than among Protestants? Here 
Engels' hostile animus is undeniable. 



The Family Under Civilization 179 



express the strongest socialist views on the family 
and are at the same time the logical outcome of 
economic evolutionism. 

As the fundamental principle he lays down that 
sexual gratification is a demand of nature and a 
physical necessity as Luther maintained, and that 
sexual abstention is harmful both to the individual 
and to society.* But monogamous marriage as a 
social institution, he subjoins, is beyond the reach 
of many, renders the sexual relations unnatural, 
and frustrates their object. 

"We shall prove that marriage founded on bour- 
geois property relations is more or less a marriage 
of compulsion which leads numerous ills in its 
train, and which fails in its purpose quite exten- 
sively if not altogether. We shall show, further- 
more, that it is a social institution, beyond the reach 
of millions, and is by no means that marriage based 
upon love, which alone corresponds with its nat- 
ural purposes. "f 

The following are the proofs which Bebel alleges 
for this proposition : 

In wedlock the sexes must be united not only 
physically by intercourse, but also spiritually by 
mutual attachment and love, made permanent by 
duty toward and pleasure in posterity. In other 
words, marriage should be a union that two per- 
sons enter into out of mutual love, in order to ac- 

*Woman. pp. 79-85. 
flbid. pp. 85, 86. 



i8o 



Ethics of the Family 



complish their natural mission, "the gratification 
of their natural instinct, and the transmission of 
one's being in the propagation of the race." 

"This motive is, however, only rarely present in 
all its purity. With the large majority of women, 
matrimony is looked upon as a species of institu- 
tion for support, which they must enter into at any 
price. Conversely, a large portion of men look 
upon marriage from a purely business standpoint, 
and from material view-points all the advantages 
and disadvantages are accurately calculated. Even 
with those marriages, in which low egoistic mo- 
tives did not turn the scales, raw reality brings 
along so much that disturbs and dissolves, that 
only in rare instances are the expectations verified 
which, in their youthful enthusiasm and ardor, the 
couple had looked forward to."* 

Marriages, thus, become money speculations and 
money matches. f Woman, in consequence, lives in 
a dependent position, is deprived of equal rights, 
despised, degraded. The misfortune of such mar- 
riages is yet increased by the difficulty of separa- 
tion. 

"When such a marriage proves a most unfor- 
tunate one — as foreseen by everybody, by the ill- 
starred victim, in most instances the woman, her- 
self — and either party decides to separate, then, 
State and Church, who never first enquire whether 

*Woman. p. 87. 
flbid. p. 93- 



The Family Under Civilization 1 8 1 



real love and natural, moral impulses, or only 
naked, obscene egotism tie the knot — now raise the 
greatest difficulties. At present, moral repulsion is 
but rarely recognized as a sufficient ground for 
separation; at present, only palpable proofs, proofs 
that always dishonor or lower one of the parties 
in public esteem, are, as a rule, demanded; sepa- 
ration is not otherwise granted." 

"We ask, Is such a marriage — and their number 
is infinite — not worse than prostitution ? The pros- 
titute has, to a certain degree, the freedom to with- 
draw from her disgraceful pursuit; moreover, she 
enjoys the privilege, when she does not live in a 
public house, to reject the purchase of the embraces 
of him who, for whatever reason, may be distasteful 
to her. But a sold married woman must submit to 
the embraces of her husband, even though she 
have a hundred reasons to hate and despise him."* 

The frequency of actions for divorce in all civil- 
ized countries shows the unhappiness and dis- 
satisfaction in the married life of present society, 
and hence also the unnaturalness of matrimonial 
relations introduced by monogamy. f 

Marriage being everywhere controlled by eco- 
nomic conditions, and the evils inherent in it being 
constantly on the increase, many nowadays refuse 
to marry. In addition, the number of legitimate 
births is in decline. A large number of children is 

*Ibid. pp. 96, 97. 
flbid. pp. 98-101. 



182 



Ethics of the Family 



dreaded, prevention of conception, abortion, infan- 
ticide are resorted to and come ever more into 
practice. The industrial occupation of women 
proves hurtful to her health and to her offspring, 
before and after it is born.* 

Among the working classes, owing to modern in- 
dustrialism, family life is to a great extent de- 
stroyed. Labor in factories separates husband and 
wife, parents and children; poverty, pressing needs 
that can not be satisfied, absence of all comfort 
and necessaries of life bring about despair, quar- 
rels, dissensions, impossibility of education, both 
physical and intellectual. f 

Again, in almost all countries there is a numer- 
ical disproportion between the sexes, the females 
exceeding the males in number; a disproportion not 
due to birth, for there are on the average more 
boys born than girls, but to unfavorable social, 
political, and economic causes. For this reason and 
the fact in addition, that many men renounce mar- 
riage, because they deem themselves unable to sup- 
port a family, a multitude of women are excluded 
from all chances of marriage, and of those who are 
not excluded, a great number can not enter wed- 
lock at the proper marriageable age.J 

From these causes, in Bebel's opinion, prostitu- 
tion with all its evils resulted as a necessary conse- 

*Woman. pp. 88, 105-113. 

flbid. p. 102. . ~ : 

* Ibid. pp. 127-146. •"■ ■ • ■ • 



The Family Under Civilization 183 



quence in all capitalistic ages and is resulting in 
ever greater dimensions in our day. If men do not 
find satisfaction in wedlock, either because they 
renounce marriage, or because they are ill-mated, 
they usually seek it in prostitution, and women, be- 
cause they can not marry or otherwise make their 
living, willingly or unwillingly prostitute them- 
selves. Hence he concludes: 

"Prostitution becomes a necessary social institu- 
tion in the capitalist world, the same as the police, 
standing armies, the Church, and wage-master- 
ship."* 

By proofs like these Bebel thinks he has estab- 
lished beyond doubt the immorality and intrinsic 
corruption of monogamy, its unnaturalness, its in- 
sufficiency for sexual gratification and unfitness for 
the propagation of the human race, its baneful 
consequences both for individuals and for society. 

Are German socialists the only accusers of mon- 
ogamy? 

Bax certainly is not less severe in its denuncia- 
tion than they are, when he writes : 

"Enforced monogamy and its correlate, prosti- 
tution, is the great historical antithesis of civiliza- 
tion in the sexual sphere, just as mastership and 
service are in the economic sphere, and as God 
and nature in the speculative sphere, or as sin and 
holiness in the sphere of ethics generally." 

"In this, as in other departments, the modern 
*Ibid. pp. 146-167. 



184 



Ethics of the Family 



man, immersed in the categories of the bourgeois 
world, sees everything through them. For him, 
therefore, there exists only legalized monogamic 
marriage and prostitution, both of which are based 
essentially on commercial considerations. The one 
is purchase, the other is hire. He cannot see the 
higher and only really moral form of marriage- 
relation which transcends both and which is based 
neither on sale nor on hire. Prostitution is im- 
moral as implying the taking advantage by the 
woman of a monopoly which costs her no labor for 
the sake of extorting money from the man. But the 
condition of legal marriage-maintenance does the 
same. 

"If it be asked, is marriage a failure? the an- 
swer of any impartial person must be — mono- 
gamic marriage is a failure — the rest is silence. 
We do not know what new form of the family the 
society of the future, in which men and women will 
be alike economically free, may evolve, and which 
may be generally adopted therein. Meanwhile, 
we ought to combat by every means within our 
power the metaphysical dogma of the inherent 
sanctity of the monogamic principle."* 

But do our American socialists abstain from im- 
pugning the monogamous family? We can scarcely 
expect this on their part, since they have in the 
highest terms recommended Engels' work on the 

*Outlook from a New Standpoint. Quoted by Goldstein, 
pp. 171. 



The Family Under Civilization 185 

"Origin of the Family," and spread among the 
masses of the American laborers a translation of 
Bebel's "Woman under Socialism." We shall re- 
produce the views of several prominent socialist 
authors. G. Wilshire in an editorial of his Maga- 
zine* speaks of the monogamous marriage in the 
following terms : 

"In Europe the conventional view to-day is 
vastly different from the conventional views of the 
middle ages. A man marries a woman much as he 
bought a cow. She becomes his chattel together 
with all her belongings, and she has about as little 
to say about herself as has his cow. The chief dif- 
ference is that he can get rid of his cow with much 
less difficulty than of his wife, or his woman, as she 
would usually be termed. 

"In America the woman has a place superior to 
that of women in other parts of the world, not 
primarily because of her own superiority, but be- 
cause the industrial conditions have made it such. 
. . . There was a time when, in order to get a 
living at all, a woman simply had to find a husband; 
and when she did find him, she very often had to 
make a living for him as well as for herself. In 
fact, such things are not entirely relegated to the 
past as yet." 

"To-day a woman can do about as she pleases, 
as far as marrying is concerned. She is no longer 
confined to being a wife for a career. . . . Not 
*Jan. 1905 p. 16. 



i86 



Ethics of the Family 



only has woman become independent of man ow- 
ing to her ability to make her way unaided by a 
husband, but she has also acquired the right of 
holding property in her own name, which is an- 
other road to her economic independence. The re- 
sult of all this is that whereas at one time when a 
woman married a man, it was absolutely for life, 
simply because she would starve to death if she 
left him, to-day she may leave him and find it easier 
to get a living than if she remained with him." 

"It is this facility of becoming independent that 
causes the facility of divorce." 

According to Wilshire, then, it would seem that 
the marriage-tie consists merely in the economic 
dependence of the woman. 

Chas. H. Kerr speaks of the monogamous mar- 
riage legalized in modern society as follows: 

"A legal marriage in this country to-day is a 
contract by which the man agrees to support the 
woman, and the woman in return gives up the con- 
trol of her own body to the man. If you doubt 
this, ask any lawyer and he will tell you that a 
'criminal assault,' such as is punished in some 
States by death and in others by imprisonment for 
life, is no crime at all in the eyes of the law if com- 
mitted by a man upon a woman to whom he has 
been legally married. Also he will tell you that a 
man charged with this crime can generally get an 
acquittal if he can prove that the woman who com- 
plains has prostituted herself. The two cases are 



The Family Under Civilization 187 

just alike. The prostitute and the woman who mar- 
ries without love for the sake of a home are pre- 
cisely on the same moral level. Each has made a 
fatal mistake and each is living in the worst kind 
of a hell that I know how to imagine."* 

G. D. Herron, in a letter which he wrote to the 
Grinnell Church committee in defense of his di- 
vorce from a faithful wife, utters the following 
condemnation of the present marriage system : 

"As a council, you are acting in defense of what 
you believe to be the sacredness of the family in- 
stitution, against which I am to you an offender. 
In order that your action on this point may be com- 
plete, let me say to you that I do not believe that 
the present marriage system is sacred or good. It 
rather seems to me to be the destruction of the lib- 
erty and love and truth which make life sacred and 
worth living. If love and truth are the basis of 
morality, then a marriage system which makes one 
human being the property of another without re- 
gard to the well-being of either the owned or the 
owner, seems to me to be the very soul of blas- 
phemy and immorality. The family founded on 
force is the survival of slavery, and one of the ex- 
pressions of slave-principles on which our whole 
civilization is built. It is a mode of superstition 
which thinks it good for human beings to own each 
other, and good for the race to have all its sources 
and tools of life owned by the few who are strong 
*The Folly of Being Good. pp. 19, 20. 



i88 



Ethics of the Family 



and cunning enough to possess them. The ethics 
of the legally and ecclesiastically enforced family 
make it possible for a man to live a life of mon- 
strous wrong, of ghastly falsehood, even of un- 
bridled lust, and yet to be wholly moral according 
to the standards by which we are judged. The 
same standards condemn and disgrace the purest 
expression of comradeship, if they cross the con- 
ventions or forget the decrees of custom. Free and 
truthful living is thus made a tragedy, to have 
overwhelming and revengeful retribution added 
unto it, while slave-living and falsehood may be 
rewarded with world-blessings and ecclesiastical 
canonization."* 

Socialist women agree with their enthusiastic de- 
fenders of the stronger sex. May Simons in her 
"Woman and the Social Problem" (Chicago 
1899), and May Walden Kerr in her "Socialism 
and the Home" (Chicago 1901) utter indignant 
denunciations of the modern monogamous mar- 
riages. Based on sordid capitalistic consideration, 
the present marriage system, they say, chills love 
and mutual affection between husband and wife, 
impedes their peace and happiness, lowers wedlock 
to the level of prostitution, leads to ever more fre- 
quent divorces, establishes in society sexual rela- 
tions which are worse than those existing among 
savages, and renders the education of children mis- 
conceived in such unions altogether impossible. 

*Int. Soc. Rev. July 1901. p. 23. 



The Family Under Civilization 189 



Adeline Champney, in an address delivered be- 
fore the Boston Social Science Club and later pub- 
lished in pamphlet form by the Comrade Co- 
operative Company, scrutinizes the modern mar- 
riage from the three-fold viewpoint of birth-sup- 
ply, parental responsibility, and individual rational 
development. The conclusion she arrives at is, that 
it deteriorates the quality of births, takes away 
from parents responsibility with regard to the rear- 
ing of offspring, and makes them unfit for the phys- 
ical and intellectual education of children. In lack 
of decency and modesty Adeline Champney equals 
Bebel, in vehemence of attack and accusation she 
even surpasses him. The following remarks which 
occur in the conclusion of her address are char- 
acteristic. 

"Marriage, I have said, is a property institu- 
tion, but in its development as such there has grown 
up with it and around it a feeling, an attitude of 
mind, a belief that amounts to a superstition, a 
superstition promoted and fortified by religion and 
boasting 'divine' authority. This is as deadly as any 
of the old theological beliefs from which we are 
freeing ourselves, and is much harder to eradicate, 
for it permeates the whole attitude of men and 
women toward each other. It is the very essence of 
our 'Christian marriage.' . . . This superstition 
may be briefly stated thus : Men have sexual needs 
which women must supply, but since this service of 
women in behalf of men entails some risk and sacri- 



190 



Ethics of the Family 



fice on their part, they must be given economic com- 
pensation." She finally terms modern marriage a 
thing of shreds and patches permeated by an at- 
mosphere of falsehood and concealment.* 

The arraignment of the monogamous marriage 
by the socialist writers quoted is definite and of a 
very serious nature. This form of marriage, they 
maintain, marks the end of man's original happi- 
ness; it is the necessary consequence of the intro- 
duction of private property, which divided man- 
kind into a possessing and dispossessed class, into 
oppressors and oppressed; it enslaves woman and 
deprives her of her dignity, while it upholds the ar- 
bitrariness and cruelty of man. Contrary to the na- 
ture of wedlock, it suppresses love between hus- 
band and wife, and puts in its place cold and mean 
economic considerations; it rather impedes than 
promotes the end and object of conjugal union, 
and while it thus is unable to fulfil its natural desti- 
nation, is always accompanied by adultery and 
prostitution as necessary attendants; it is, in a word, 
the very embodiment of immorality, not open and 
naked, but hidden under and consecrated by relig- 
ion. 

Concerning this summary of charges against 
monogamy, we shall for the present make only two 
remarks. First, we can not but wonder at the in- 
dignation with which socialists condemn monogamy, 

*The Woman Question. 2nd Edition. New York 1903. 
pp. 26-29. 



The Family Under Civilization 191 



and especially at the charge of immorality which 
they raise against it. To the promiscuity, whether 
restricted or unrestricted, of primitive men they 
had not only no objection whatever, but termed it 
even good and moral. Whence, now, so much op- 
position to monogamy? It is just as much the out- 
come of the economic conditions of the capitalistic 
era, as, in their opinion, the group marriage was 
the result of the needs and conditions of prehistoric 
times. And as capitalism itself is a necessary stage 
in human development, so the restrictions inherent 
in monogamy proved beneficial and necessary for 
the evolution of the human species. 

But, as we have seen in a preceding chapter, 
whatever results from the needs and conditions of 
a given epoch, and whatever contributes to the 
advancement of society, is, according to socialist 
ethics, morally good, insomuch that even capitalism 
can not be condemned as bad. Why, then, should 
monogamy be termed immoral? From the socialist 
point of view there is no reason discernible. It 
would almost seem as if monogamy were objection- 
able on account of its restrictions, and group mar- 
riage were approved on account of the freedom it 
affords. 

We should like to remark, secondly, that social- 
ists have an altogether wrong conception of Chris- 
tian marriage. To their mind the monogamous 
marriage is a civil contract, by which the woman 
for lifetime surrenders herself to man to supply 



192 



Ethics of the Family 



his sexual needs, and the man in compensation 
takes upon himself the obligation of providing her 
with the means of sustenance. Socialists entertain 
this idea alike of the Christian marriage and of what 
they call the bourgeois marriage ; that is, the mar- 
riage which grows out of the conditions of capital- 
istic society and is legalized by the capitalistic 
State. For they allow no distinction between the 
one and the other, nor can they allow any, since in 
their opinion Christianity itself is, just like capital- 
istic society, the outcome of economic conditions, 
and the Church is no more than the handmaid of 
the State, surrounding its actions with superstition 
and a feigned divine authority. 

It is true, the modern bourgeois State has shown 
a remarkable tendency toward degrading marriage 
to a merely civil contract, and has, in fact, achieved 
great success in this direction, after it has of late 
taken into its hand all matrimonial affairs, to regu- 
late them by its own legislation and to the exclusion 
of ecclesiastical interference. It has assumed this 
attitude in full consistency with the divorce it made 
from religion, and the unbounded absolutism 
which it professes and which it was taught by ex- 
treme modern liberalism, that very liberalism 
which, like socialism, is based on atheism or materi- 
alism. 

With this tendency of the modern State, how- 
ever, the Church has not co-operated, but has, on 
the contrary, condemned and combated it in many 



The Family Under Civilization 193 



ways. The latest proofs thereof are the Syllabus of 
Pius IX and the Encyclical Letter of Leo XIII on 
Christian Marriage. Nor could she do otherwise. 
For she finds in Scripture itself a most sublime, a 
divine idea of matrimony expressed and unfolded, 
which is totally different from that drawn up by un- 
believing liberalism. Marriage, according to the 
words of Christ Himself related in the Gospel, is 
an institution of God, the Creator of human na- 
ture. 

"Have you not read that He who made man 
from the beginning, made them male and female? 
And He said for this cause shall a man leave father 
and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and the 
two shall he in one flesh" {Matt. xix. 4, 5). 

Marriage according to the Christian conception 
is a contract, but one elevated to the dignity of a 
sacrament and sanctified by Christ; one whose ob- 
ject is not the gratification of lust, but the propa- 
gation and the education of the human kind; one 
which, for that purpose, man and woman freely 
enter into and by which they surrender to one an- 
other their bodies, acquiring equal mutual rights; 
one which it is in no man's power to dissolve. 

"God created man to His own image, . . . 
male and female He created them. And God 
blessed them saying: Increase and multiply, and fill 
the earth" {Gen. i. 27, 28). 

"The wife has not power of her own body, but 
the husband. And in like manner the husband also 



194 



Ethics of the Family 



has not power of his own body, but the wife" ( i 
Cor. vii. 4) . 

"They are not two, but one flesh. What there- 
fore God has joined together, let no man put asun- 
der" {Matt. xix. 6). 

The duties of mutual love and assistance are 
very touchingly set forth by St. Paul. He tells the 
husbands: 

"Love your wives as Christ loved the Church 
and delivered Himself up for it, that He might 
sanctify it. . . . So also ought men to love their 
wives as their own bodies. He that loveth his wife, 
loveth himself. For no man ever hated his own 
flesh; but nourisheth and cherisheth it, as also 
Christ does the Church, because we are members 
of His body, of His flesh and His bones" (Eph. v. 
25, 26, 28-30). 

The duties of the wives conversely are defined 
by St. Paul in the following passages. 

"Let women be subject to their husbands as to 
the Lord, because the husband is the head of the 
wife as Christ is the head of the Church. He is 
the Saviour of His body. Therefore as the Church 
is subject to Christ, so let the wives be subject to 
their husbands in all things." 

"Let the wife fear her husband" (Eph. v. 22- 
24, 33); 

This is not marriage as socialists characterize it; 
there is in it no sex-slavery, no oppression and 
tyranny on the part of the husband, no bondage 



The Family Under Civilization 195 



and degradation on the part of the wife, no com- 
mercial transactions and absence of mutual affec- 
tion. 

Christian wedlock is pure, ennobled, and ele- 
vated love, an institution that does not spring from 
economic condition, from lust and indigence, but 
from divine wisdom; that is calculated to bring 
happiness to those united by it and to promote the 
welfare of the human race; that, instead of being 
the play of human passions, is regulated and firmly 
held together by the will and law of God. It is the 
realization of a sublime divine idea. 

Men, imperfect and subject to passions as they 
are, do not generally live up to great ideals, but re- 
main in many respects far below them. Hence we 
can not expect that marriage among Christians has 
always attained to its ideal perfection; and it may 
with some reason be objected, that in our days it is 
farther than ever from its divinely intended beauty. 
But if this be so, where are the reasons of this de- 
cadence? In the atheistical teachings which in our 
days extinguish belief in God and respect for His 
law in the hearts of men; in the materialistic ten- 
dency which directs men to earthly goods and 
enjoyments as their supreme happiness; in the god- 
less laws, which generally suppress religion and 
banish it from public life and, in particular, degrade 
the character of the matrimonial contract; in mod- 
ern industrialism, which ignoring justice, charity, 
and the moral law in general, disrupts the family by 



196 



Ethics of the Family 



separating husband and wife, parents and children; 
in a word, in that liberalism and materialism, 
which are praised as the climax of modern enlight- 
enment. In our day not the Christian religion but 
its suppression, is the cause of the unhappy mar- 
riages and the numberless divorces ; not the Church, 
but her persecutors. On her part the Church has 
always upheld the sanctity and purity of matri- 
mony, and defended its freedom and indissolubil- 
ity against princes and governments as well as 
against the power of public opinion and the majesty 
of modern science. Nor has she struggled in vain. 
Flow great even to-day is the number of her faith- 
ful children, who contracting marriage and living 
in it in conformity with her laws, enjoy peace and 
happiness at their hearths and rear a pure and vir- 
tuous posterity, which is the hope of the human 
race ! 



CHAPTER III 



THE FAMILY UNDER SOCIALISM 



Section I 

The Abolition of the Present Form of the Family 

If, as Karl Marx maintains, every historically 
developed social form is in a state of flux, the 
family must from age to age undergo continual 
transformations, to reach its final stage of develop- 
ment. And if, as socialists generally tell us, do- 
mestic society in its present form no longer answers 
the needs of the masses, but has become an impedi- 
ment to freedom, happiness, and advancement, 
then its disappearance is instant in the near future, 
and the era of a new conjugal and parental life is 
already dawning. Socialist writers and speakers, 
when consoling the suffering laborer with this 
hopeful prospect, are very positive in their pre- 
dictions. In this sanguine mood H. M. Hyndman 
writes : 

"Breaking down and building up go on slowly 
together, and new forms arise to displace the old. 
It is the same with the family. That, in the Ger- 
man-Christian sense of marriage for life and 
responsibility of parents for children born in 

197 



Ethics of the Family 



wedlock, is almost at an end even now, . . . 
and must result in a widely extended Com- 
munism."* 

Bax speaks with still greater clearness. 

"Beneath throne, altar, and hearth, in their 
present form, all Socialists know that there lies the 
market. They know that the market is the bedrock 
on which the throne, the altar, and the hearth of 
the nineteenth century rest, and that this bedrock 
shattered, the said throne, altar, and hearth will 
be doomed."f 

"The transformation of the current family- 
form, founded as it is on the economic dependence 
of woman, the maintenance of the young and the 
aged falling on individuals rather than on the com- 
munity, etc., into a freer, more real, and, therefore, 
a higher form, must inevitably follow the economic 
revolution which will place the means of produc- 
tion and distribution under the control of all for 
the good of all. The bourgeois 'hearth' with its 
jerry-built architecture, its cheap art, its shoddy 
furniture, its false sentiment, its pretentious pseu- 
do-culture, will then be as dead as Roman Brit- 
ain.";!: 

The communist manifesto unhesitatingly affirms : 
"The bourgeois family will vanish as a matter 

*The Historical Basis of Socialism, p. 452. Quoted by 
Goldstein. Socialism, p. 147. 
fReligion of Socialism, p. 136. 
ilbid. p. 145. 



The Family Under Socialism 199 



of course, when its complement (prostitution) van- 
ishes, and both will vanish with the vanishing of 
capital." 

Engels explains why and how the disappearance 
of the monogamous family will come to pass. 

"We are now," he says, "approaching a social 
revolution in which the old economic foundations 
of monogamy will disappear just as surely as those 
of its complement, prostitution. Monogamy arose 
through the concentration of considerable wealth 
in one hand — a man's hand — and from the en- 
deavor to bequeath this wealth to the children of 
this man to the exclusion of all others. This neces- 
sitated monogamy on the woman's but not on the 
man's part. Hence this monogamy of woman in no 
way hindered open or secret polygamy of men. 
Now the impending social revolution will reduce 
this whole care of inheritance to a minimum by 
changing at least the overwhelming part of perma- 
nent and inheritable wealth — the means of produc- 
tion — into social property."* 

Socialist writers, of course, make no distinction 
between the bourgeois family and the Christian 
family, just as they make none between bourgeois 
and Christian marriage. Hence the Christian 
family also is expected to disappear with the com- 
munistic evolution of society. 
*Origin of the Family, p. 91. 



200 



Ethics of the Family 



Section II 
Marriage under Socialism 

The present form of the family, then, will disap- 
pear; but it will pass away only to make room for 
another of greater perfection. For breaking down 
and building up go together, and in universal evo- 
lution the lower stage when disappearing intro- 
duces the higher. 

To learn the nature of the new family that is 
expected to come in the final evolution of society, 
we must first establish what marriage, the nucleus 
of the family, will then be. From the objections 
made against marriage in bourgeois society, we 
may without difficulty guess of what kind it is 
hoped and desired it shall be in the co-operative 
commonwealth. It must be contracted without any 
economic considerations, so that love alone is its 
bond of union and vital principle; it must imply no 
inferiority of the woman, but guarantee to her 
equality with and independence of the man; it 
must, because it is a personal affair, be free 
from any legal restrictions or constraint; and 
finally, in order to remove the danger of adultery 
and prostitution, it must give full opportunity of 
sexual gratification. Such is evidently the ideal of 
marriage which socialist writers bear in their mind, 
when they denounce the monogamy of the capital- 
ist era. And such ideal qualities, they are confident, 



The Family Under Socialism 201 



will inevitably develop in marriage after the aboli- 
tion of private property and the introduction of 
collectivism. 

Engels first essayed to show that this hope will 
be fulfilled. 

All economic considerations will then cease. In- 
stead of them love will become the bond of marital 
union and the only rule of sexual relations. This 
of course is not spiritual, but merely sex-love, which 
alone counts in a materialistic theory. Nevertheless, 
in his opinion, it will have a high standard and 
great intensity. 

"Our sex-love is essentially different from the 
Eros of the ancients. In the first place it presup- 
poses mutual love. In this respect woman is the 
equal of man, while in the antique Eros her per- 
mission is by no means always asked. In the sec- 
ond place our sex-love has such a degree of intensity 
and duration that in the eyes of both parties lack 
of possession and separation appear as a great, if 
not the greatest, calamity. In order to possess one 
another they play for high stakes, even to the point 
of risking their lives, a thing heard of only in adul- 
tery during the classical age. And a new moral 
standard is introduced for sexual intercourse. We 
not only ask: 'What is legal or illegal?' but also: 
'What is caused by mutual love or not?' "* 

Love under communism will be free; first of all 
in making marriage. In the era of capitalistic pro- 
origin of the Family, p. 93. 



202 



Ethics of the Family 



duction, the marriage agreement, being according 
to bourgeois conception a contract, and even the 
most important one, was formally free and volun- 
tary, in so much that without the consent of the 
contracting parties nothing could be done. But it 
was only too well known how this consent w T as ob- 
tained. Marriage remained a class marriage. But 
the ruling class remained subject to well-known 
economic influences, and, therefore, marriage by 
free selection could be seen only in exceptional 
cases. In the oppressed class alone love matches 
were the rule. 

"Hence the full freedom of marriage can become 
general only after all minor economic considera- 
tions, that still exert such a powerful influence on 
the choice of a mate for life, have been removed by 
the abolition of capitalistic production and of the 
property relations created by it. Then no other mo- 
tive will remain but mutual fondness."* 

Men and women will be equal, and men will no 
longer have supremacy in marriage. 

"The supremacy of man in marriage is simply 
the consequence of his economic superiority and 
will fall with the abolition of the latter." 

"Remove the economic consideration that now 
force women to submit to the customary disloyalty 
of men, and you will place women on an equal foot- 
ing with men."f 

*Origin of the Family, pp. 95-99. 
flbid. p. 99. 



The Family Under Socialism 203 



Marriage founded on sex-love will be monoga- 
mous, for "sex-love is exclusive by its nature." But 
it will under communism not be indissoluble. 

"The indissolubility of marriage is partly the 
consequence of economic conditions, under which 
monogamy arose, partly tradition from the time 
where the connection between the economic situa- 
tion and monogamy, not yet clearly understood, 
was carried to extremes by religion. To-day, it has 
been perforated a hundred times. If marriage 
founded on love alone is moral, then it follows that 
marriage is moral only as long as love lasts. The 
duration of an attack of individual sex-love varies 
considerably according to individual disposition, 
especially in men. A positive cessation of fondness 
or its replacement by a new passionate love makes 
a separation a blessing for both parties and so- 
ciety."* 

Separation being thus left free when love ceases, 
and the equality of men and women being estab- 
lished, "humanity will be spared the useless wading 
through the mire of a divorce case," and prostitu- 
tion and adultery will disappear.f 

As to the new sexual relations which will thus 
arise under socialism, Engels makes the general 
remark : 

"What we anticipate about the adjustment of 
sexual relations after the impending downfall of 

*Ibid. pp. 99, 100. 
flbid. pp. 91, 100. 



204 



Ethics of the Family 



capitalist production, is mainly of a negative na- 
ture and mostly confined to elements that will dis- 
appear. But what will be added? That will be de- 
cided after a new generation has come to maturity, 
a race of men who never in their lives have had 
any occasion for buying with money or other eco- 
nomic means of power the surrender of a woman; 
a race of women who have never had any occasion 
for surrendering to any man for any other reason 
but love, or for refusing to surrender to their lover 
from fear of economic consequences. Once such 
people are in the world, they will not give a mo- 
ment's thought to what we to-day believe should be 
their course. They will follow their own practices 
and fashion their own public opinion about the in- 
dividual practice of every person — only this and 
nothing more."* 

Socialist literature, whether philosophical or 
popular, contains no disavowal of the free-love 
marriage as characterized by Engels in the pre- 
ceding passages; what it offers to the reading pub- 
lic is but a reassertion and fuller explanation of 
its right and practice. 

Bebel is of all contemporary socialists the most 
enthusiastic advocate of this new form of marriage. 
Freedom of love is according to him a demand of 
nature, not only for men but also for women, and 
will find its full realization in final society. To 
quote from his "Woman" : 

*Origin of the Family, p. 100. 



The Family Under Socialism 205 



"The woman of the future society is socially and 
economically independent; she is no longer subject 
to even a vestige of dominion or exploitation; she 
is free, the peer of man, the mistress of her lot." 

"In the choice of love, she is, like man, free and 
unhampered. She woos or is wooed, and closes the 
bond from no considerations other than her own 
inclinations. This bond is a private contract, cele- 
brated without the intervention of any functionary 
— just as marriage was a private contract until 
deep in the Middle Ages. (?) Socialism creates in 
this nothing new; it merely restores, at a higher 
level of civilization and under new social forms, 
that which prevailed at a more primitive social 
stage, and before private property began to rule so- 
ciety."* 

"Seeing that all circumstances and conditions, 
which until then condemned large numbers of 
women to celibacy and prostitution, will have van- 
ished, man can no longer superimpose himself." 

"Matthilde Reichardt-Stromberg is of the 
opinion that if every woman were Lucretia Flori- 
ani, that is a great soul like George Sand, who 
draws her own picture in Lucretia Floriani, they 
should be free for the 'preservation of their equilib- 
rium to quicken the circulation of their heart's 
blood in whatever way it may seem good to them.' 

"Why should that be a privilege of the 'great 
souls' only, and not of the others also, who are not 
*Woman. pp. 343. 



206 



Ethics of the Family 



'great souls,' and can be none? No such difference 
exists to us. If a Goethe and a George Sand — to 
take these two from the many who have acted and 
are acting like them — live according to the inclina- 
tion of their hearts — and about Goethe's love affairs 
whole libraries are published that are devoured by 
his male and female admirers in wrapt ecstasy — 
why condemn in others that which, done by a 
Goethe or a George Sand, becomes the subject of 
ecstatic admiration?"* 

As the choice of love, so is intercourse between 
those that love one another absolutely free and un- 
trammeled by any law, the latter being but the 
consummation of the former and a merely private 
concern, f 

The free-love marriage is also according to Be- 
bel dissolvable. 

"If incompatibility, disenchantment or repulsion 
set in between two persons that have come together, 
morality commands that the unnatural and, there- 
fore immoral, bond be dissolved.":}: 

The equality of man and woman as to rights of 
every kind, the latter's complete independence of the 
former, is, in Bebel's opinion, the final goal of social 
development, the object for which socialists fight. 

"Of all existing parties in Germany, the Social 
Democratic Party is the only one which has placed 

*Woman. pp. 344., 345. 
flbid. p. 343. 
flbid. p. 344. 



The Family Under Socialism 207 



in its programme the full equality of woman, her 
emancipation from all dependence and oppression. 
And the party has done so, not for agitational rea- 
sons, but out of necessity, out of principle. There 
can be no emancipation of humanity without the 
social independence and equality of the sexes * 

u The complete emancipation of woman and her 
equality with man is the final goal of our social 
development, whose realization no power on earth 
can prevent; and this realization is possible only 
by a social change that shall abolish the rule of 
man over man."f 

Similarly the Erfurt program demands the aboli- 
tion of all laws which subordinate woman to man 
in public and private life. 

Kautsky defends free sexual intercourse as 
moral. 

"The same phenomena, say of free sexual inter- 
course or of indifference to property, can in one case 
be the product of moral depravity in a society 
where a strict monogamy and the sanctity of prop- 
erty are recognized as necessary; in another case 
it can be the highly moral product of a healthy so- 
cial organism which requires for its social needs 
neither property in a particular woman nor that 
(property) in particular means of consumption and 
production."^: 

*Ibid. pp. 5, 6. 
tlbid. p. 349. 

$ Ethics and the Materialist Conception of History, p. 193. 



208 



Ethics of the Family 



Kautsky, moreover, regards full individual 
freedom in regard to sexual relations as a problem 
which a proletarian regime has to solve. 

"The capitalist mode of production has created 
the problem of organizing the social process of 
production on a homogeneous and systematic basis. 
This problem involves a fitting in of the individual 
into a fixed order, to whose regulations he has to 
accommodate himself. On the other hand, the 
same mode of production has brought the indi- 
vidual more than ever to self-consciousness, placed 
him on his own feet, and divorced him from society. 
More than ever people demand to be allowed the 
opportunity of developing their own personality, 
and of determining their relations to each other, 
and that the more freely, the more delicate and in- 
dividual those relations are ; thus in the first place, 
their marriage relations; also, moreover, their rela- 
tions as artists and thinkers, to the outside world. 
The regulation of the social class and the emanci- 
pation of the individual, those are the historical 
problems which capitalism has placed before so- 
ciety. They appear to contradict each other; yet 
they admit of simultaneous solution, because each 
of them concerns different fields of social life." 

"Communism in material production, anarchy in 
the intellectual — that is the type of Socialist mode 
of production, as it will develop from the rule of 
the proletariat."* 
*On the Morrow of the Social Revolution, pp. 38, 40. 



The Family Under Socialism 209 



In the literature of the German Social Democ- 
racy the same tenets are frequently set forth. As 
their stanchest advocates we may mention J. Stern 
(Thesen iiber den Socialismus) , A. Hoffmann (Die 
Zehn Gebote und die Besitzende Klasse), Koehler 
(Der Socialdemokratische Staat), and L. Gumplo- 
wicz (Ehe und Freie Liebe), who finds no reason 
for condemning those men and women who under 
socialism might be prompted by love to practise 
polygamy or polyandry. 

Women still more clamorously insist on their 
right of free-love. 

Oda Oldberg demands not only that women be 
not debarred from motherhood, no matter whether 
they have a certificate of marriage or not, but also 
that for that purpose abortion be left free to 
them.* 

The English socialists Morris and Bax in their 
joint work, "Growth and Outcome of Socialism,'* 
concur with Engels and Bebel and other Ger- 
man Social Democrats in their opinion concerning 
marriage. To quote : 

"As to the particulars of life under the Socialistic 
order, we may, to begin with, say concerning mar- 
riage and the family that it would be affected by the 
great change, firstly in economics, and secondly in 
ethics. The present marriage system is based on 

*See Dr. E. Kaeser, Der Sozialdemokrat Hat das Wort. 3rd 
Edition. Freiburg 1905. pp. 191-200. Stimmen aus Maria 
Laach. 1907. Drittes Heft. pp. 267-284. 



210 



Ethics of the Family 



the general supposition of economic dependence of 
the woman on the man, and the consequent neces- 
sity for his making provision for her, which she 
can legally enforce. This basis would disappear 
with the advent of social economic freedom, and no 
binding contract would be necessary between the 
parties as regards livelihood; while property in 
children would cease to exist, and every infant that 
came into the world would be born into full citizen- 
ship, and would enjoy all its advantages, whatever 
the conduct of its parents might be. Thus a new 
development of the family would take place on the 
basis, not of a determined life-long business ar- 
rangement, to be formally and nominally held to, 
irrespective of circumstances, but on mutual inclina- 
tion and affection, an association terminable at the 
will of either party. It is easy to see how great the 
gain would be to morality and sentiment in this re- 
gard. At present in this country (England) at 
least, a legal and quasi-moral offence has to be 
committed before the obviously unworkable con- 
tract can be set aside. On the Continent, it is true, 
even at the present day the marriage can be dis- 
solved by mutual consent; but either party can, if 
so inclined, force the other into subjection, and pre- 
vent the exercise of his or her freedom. It is per- 
haps necessary to state that this change would not 
be made merely formally and mechanically. There 
would be no vestige of reprobation weighing on the 
dissolution of one tie and the forming of another. 



The Family Under Socialism 211 



For the abhorrence of the oppression of the man by 
the woman or the woman by the man . . . will 
certainly be an essential outcome of the ethics of the 
New Society."* 

We see that in one point these two authors im- 
prove on Engels and Bebel. They do not require 
for the dissolution of the marriage-tie the consent 
of both husband and wife, as German socialists do, 
but regard the will of either party as sufficient. 

In his novel "News from Nowhere," published 
serially in the "Comrade" (November, 1901-May, 
1903), Morris gives a pictorial representation of 
the love relationship to come into existence under 
the free conditions of socialist society.f 

Edward Carpenter, the founder of "London 
Justice," in his latest book, "Love's Coming of 
Age," in strong terms asserts the necessity of free 
woman and of free-love. 

"Here there is no solution except the freedom 
of the woman — which means of course also the 
freedom of the masses of the people, men and 
women, and the ceasing altogether of economic 
slavery. There is no solution which will not in- 
clude the redemption of the terms 'free woman' 
and 'free-love' to their true and rightful signifi- 
cance. Let every woman whose heart bleeds for the 
sufferings of her sex, hasten to declare herself and 
to constitute herself, as far as she possibly can, a 

*The Growth and Outcome of Socialism, pp. 299, 300. 
fSee Goldstein. Socialism, pp. 160-163. 



212 



Ethics of the Family 



free woman. Let her accept the term with all the 
odium that belongs to it, let her insist on her right 
to speak, dress, think, act and above all to use her 
sex, as she deems best; let her face the scorn and 
ridicule; let her 'lose her own life' if she likes; as- 
sured that only so can come deliverance, and that 
only when the free woman is honored will the pros- 
titute cease to exist."* 

Carpenter's work was published in Chicago by 
Chas. H. Kerr & Co., in 1903, and brought to the 
book market with a high recommendation by 
Leonard D. Abbott in the "Comrade." He called 
it as suggestive and noble a treatment of this sub- 
ject, from the socialist point of view, as has yet 
appeared in the English language. His criticism 
was endorsed by other reviewers. 

Marion Craig Wentworth says of the book in 
the "Socialist Spirit" (Chicago), November, 
1902 : 

"This is a comprehensive and philosophical 
treatise on sexual science and marriage. Like all 
of Edward Carpenter's productions, it is written 
from high ground. There is no doubt that as soon 
as woman is free politically and economically, the 
marriage relation will undergo a radical change. 
For a comprehension of the possible lines upon 
which such changes may be worked out one may 
well turn to this little book of Mr. Carpenter's. 

*Love's Coming of Age. Chicago 1903. p. 62. Quoted by 
Goldstein. Socialism, p. 156. 



The Family Under Socialism 213 



It is a real contribution, and the emancipated should 
not fail to have it on their book shelves."* 

The publisher introduces the fourth edition, 
1906, to the reading public with the following com- 
mendatory words : 

"This work is undoubtedly the most satisfactory 
work that has thus far appeared on the relation of 
the sexes under the coming social order, and on 
rational sex ethics during the period of transition. "f 

Chas. H. Kerr, from wmose pen are the preced- 
ing lines, in one of his red pamphlets gives to lov- 
ing couples the following lesson on marriage : 

"Now a word about marriage. Because I have 
said that many wives are in the position of slaves, 
I do not want you to think that I would for a mo- 
ment advise you and your sweetheart to do without 
the marriage ceremony. Some time, when the 
working class get the power, they will change the 
marriage laws so as to make them just. That is 
true, and it is also true that the love is what makes 
your union sacred and the ceremony has nothing to 
do with it. But remember that you have to live 
among people who do not understand these things, 
and the chances are a thousand to one that they 
will make you unhappy in one way or another if 
you do not have the ceremony performed.":}: 

The foregoing quotations show that free-love 

*Quoted by Goldstein. Socialism, pp. 155, 156. 
fWhat to Read on Socialism. Nov. 1906. p. 29. 
+ The Folly of Being Good. p. 22. 



214 



Ethics of the Family 



marriage is by no means unknown or unsavory to 
American socialists. It is true, the press has hereto- 
fore on this point been more guarded in this coun- 
try than in Germany, undoubtedly from fear of 
offense. But now that the writings of Engels, Be- 
bel, Morris, Carpenter, are circulating widely, less 
caution is necessary. The intellectual leaders grow 
bolder in their writings, and among the rank and 
file not a few begin to appreciate the new marriage 
theory. 

In the National Convention of the Socialist 
Party in Chicago, 1904, the question of monogamy 
was discussed by the women delegates in a special 
meeting, of which the Chicago Interocean, May 3, 
1904, gives the following report: 

"There are about twenty-five women delegates 
to the convention, many of them from Montana, 
Colorado and Wyoming, where the polls are open 
to women." 

"The question of monogamy has been of inter- 
est to the women delegates and came up before 
them at their convention held on Saturday. Yes- 
terday the subject was much discussed about the 
hall, though it did not come up for general debate. 
'Women should be financially independent of men, 
and in socialism this is possible,' said Luella R. 
Kraybill, the State Organizer for Kansas, who 
comes from Coffeyville. 'Women now marry for 
homes, but if they were independent they would 
marry for love. We Socialists believe that only 



The Family Under Socialism 215 



magnetic attraction and soul affinity justify mar- 
riage. If after marriage they learned that they 
had made a mistake, they should go before a justice 
and be divorced merely by signifying their mutual 
agreement to the divorce. Then they should try 
again, but with some one else.' 'We believe in 
marriage, but believe in divorce, and not a monog- 
amy only for men, as is the imperfect monogamy of 
to-day. Where a woman had more children than 
she could care for, the State should support them. 
But with marriage limited to soul attraction, a per- 
son, either man or woman, might find but one per- 
son in a lifetime that either one would care to 
marry.' 

" 'Home ties nowadays are nothing but a mat- 
ter of home economics,' said Mrs. Corrine Brown. 
'Under Socialism a woman would be entitled by 
three hours' work each day, to her food, clothes 
and shelter. She would marry for affection only, 
because she would not have to marry for support, 
which would bring about a higher ideal of home 
life and a strengthening of home ties.' " 

We see, then, that free-love has outgrown the 
stage of a mere theory and has already become an 
object of ardent desire. Nay, proceeding still fur- 
ther, it has commenced to pass over into practice, 
not only secretly but openly. 



2l6 



Ethics of the Family 



Section III 
Free-Love Actually in Practice 

According to Engels, the proletarian family is 
no longer strictly monogamous. Love in man's re- 
lation to woman can become and in fact becomes 
the rule among the oppressed classes, the proleta- 
rians of our day, no matter whether this relation is 
sanctioned or not. 

Among them the fundamental conditions of 
classic and bourgeois monogamy are abolished; its 
real foundation, property, is missing; civil law not 
caring for the laborer or being useless for him, 
the relations between husband and wife cease prac- 
tically to be legal and become personal; the woman, 
having obtained an independent position, has re- 
gained the right of separation; and if a couple can 
not agree, they separate without any interference 
of civil or ecclesiastical authority.* 

Thus to the socialist mind freer sexual relations 
are actually developing in the bosom of decaying 
capitalist society and preparing a stage of higher 
and more ideal married life, the only bond of 
which consists in free-love. 

We can not admit as an established fact that 
nowadays among the working classes free-love with 
private divorce, whenever the married parties agree 
to it, is generally prevalent. There is among them 

♦Origin of the Family, pp. 86, 87. 



The Family Under Socialism 217 



still too much love for the family and especially 
for their children, too much moral sense and con- 
science to allow wedlock to fall to so low a level. 
This is especially the case where religious convic- 
tions, however much weakened they may be, have 
not yet entirely died away. Whether and how far 
among the socialist proletarians free-love and pri- 
vate divorce are in vogue it is difficult to ascertain, 
for it is in the nature of such practices that they 
are withdrawn from public attention. But if so- 
cialist leaders themselves unreservedly assert that 
they in fact prevail, or are beginning to prevail 
among their comrades, we are compelled to believe 
their word. Should they exaggerate, we must leave 
it to those whose morals are wrongly characterized 
to correct their leaders' assertions and to re-estab- 
lish their reputation before the world. 

One fact, however, is certain beyond all doubt, 
and known to the whole civilized world: the 
fact, that among the higher strata of contem- 
porary socialists, free-love marriages have existed 
and are still existing, not secretly, but publicly, and 
with the full approval of the party press or party 
leaders. 

The first marriage of that kind was that of Karl 
Marx's daughter Eleanor with Edward Aveling. 
Eleanor was the most prominent woman socialist 
ever known, who devoted her extraordinary talents 
to the interests of socialism. Having imbibed the 
teachings of her father, she believed in atheism, 



218 Ethics of the Family 



economic determinism, and free-love. In the early 
eighties she made the acquaintance of her father's 
friend Edward Aveling, who gained a national 
reputation by translating Marx's "Capital" into 
English. He, too, was an atheist and believer in 
free-love. Thus harmonizing in their views, they 
fell in love and lived together as husband and 
wife, in accordance with the socialist morals of 
unconventional intercourse of the sexes, and with 
the full knowledge of Marx and the other 
leaders. 

Aveling and Eleanor worked together in the so- 
cialist movement. In 1886 and 1887 they made, to- 
gether with Liebknecht, a fifteen-weeks' tour in the 
United States, under the auspices of the Socialist 
Labor Party, and addressed about fifty meetings 
in the principal cities of the Union. 

But it came to pass that Aveling's love faded 
away. Mrs. Caroline Corbin relates in "Labor and 
Capital," April, 1903, that at the death of his legal 
wife, an aged and invalid woman living in the 
meantime in London, Aveling married another 
woman and discarded Eleanor. The latter's fond- 
ness remaining unabated, a tragic catastrophe ere- 
long ensued. Eleanor, disgusted with the world, 
committed suicide; Aveling, sex-crazed and filled 
with the unrest of an irreligious spirit, soon after 
followed her in death.* 

Socialist writers have never disproved these facts, 

*See Goldstein. Socialism, pp. 245-252. 



The Family Under Socialism 219 



but only attempted to make socialism unanswerable 
for them. 

A more striking instance of a free-love marriage 
came to public notice in the spring of 1906, when 
the Russian socialist Maxim Gorky landed in New 
York as a refugee from his country. On his ar- 
rival it was reported that Madame Andreiva, who 
accompanied him as his wife, was his mistress only, 
and not his legal consort. When on this account 
general indignation arose against him, and, in con- 
sequence, he and his lady companion were debarred 
from better society, the socialists raised their voice 
in the press, not to deny the fact of bigamy, but to 
justify their matrimonial relations by the right and 
sacredness of free-love. 

Eugene V. Debs wrote in the "Worker," April 
28, 1906: 

"With open arms and hearts attuned to love and 
greeting, we of the proletariat welcome Maxim 
Gorky and his wife to these shores.'' 

"Christ-like is his love for the lowly and despised 
and his sacrifice of self, and Christ-like his perse- 
cution by the heartless pharisees." 

"Had Gorky been an intellectual prostitute, he 
would be the social lion of the hour, especially here 
in the United States, and every door of the 'upper 
classes' would swing inward at his touch. But 
through all the fiery ordeals that have fallen to his 
lot he has preserved inviolate his mental and moral 
integrity; he has fought bravely and unflinchingly 



220 



Ethics of the Family 



the battle of the oppressed and heavy-laden of the 
earth." 

"Bold and intrepid champion of social justice 
and passionate lover of freedom, the ruling class,- 
to whom he has never crooked the knee, must find 
some excuse to pour their garbage upon his head 
and so they, arch-hypocrites that they are, affect to 
feel shocked at some irregularity alleged to have 
been discovered in his domestic relations, and now 
raise the cry that he is unclean." 

"No wonder their refined sensibilities are 
shocked by the advent of genius, healthy, moral and 
sane, in full possession of all the virtues, nobility of 
soul, loftiness of mind and purity of heart; no won- 
der they bar the doors of their harems and hostel- 
ries and draw the blinds in dread and fear of a 
fresh and purifying breath of moral atmosphere." 

Clarence Meily writes in the Toledo "Social- 
ist" : 

"Wherein lay Maxim Gorky's fault? What is 
the height and front of this most serious offending? 
It is not far to seek. By placing a woman not his 
legally wedded wife in an accredited position, ac- 
knowledging her before the world as his intimate 
and beloved, he struck an unforgiveable blow at 
that most sacred and most dismal of human rela- 
tions, the bourgeois marriage. The typical bour- 
geois marriage ... is a pure expression of 
property interests. Ownership, the lust of accumu- 
lation and the desire to transmit the prestige of 



The Family Under Socialism 221 



power and property to descendants, in a word, the 
instinct of class preservation, is its occasion and 
its object." 

"Proletarians, who have been generously relieved 
of all property rights and interests by the capitalist 
class, are at the present time alone free to contract 
ideal unions based solely on mutual love and termi- 
nating with their raison d' etre. But a proletarian 
system of conjugal relations is impracticable and 
dangerous so long as the institution of private 
property preserves woman's economic dependence 
upon man, and besides, in any event, would be fatal 
to the hereditary proprietorship. Indeed, in the 
general loosening of the marital bonds bemoaned 
by religious doctrinaires at the present day, may be 
traced a direct effect of the decadence of capitalistic 
property. And it was as a prophet, who was in ad- 
vance of his era, that Gorky 'sinned' and suffered."* 

This time the socialists found a stanch defender 
Ins Professor Giddings of Columbia University, 
who, struggling against the current of public opin- 
ion, wrote in the "Independent," April 26, 1906, 
the following lines in favor of the persecuted Rus- 
sian couple. 

"They (Maxim Gorky and Andreiva) insist 
that it is not right to set up a technical legal rela- 
tionship, an economic convenience, or a circum- 
stance of social conventionality as morally superior 
to the spontaneous preference of a man and woman 

*Quoted by the Worker. June 16, 1906. 



222 



Ethics of the Family 



who know, and whose friends know, that they love 
each other. In this belief Gorky and Madame An- 
dreiva are not singular. In whole or in part it has 
been held and taught by some of the best men and 
women that have yet lived." 

Having mentioned as such authorities Dante, Pe- 
trarch, John Milton, Shelley, Goethe, Richard 
Wagner, John Stuart Mill, George Eliot, Herbert 
Spencer, he concludes: 

"Perhaps all these eminent persons, being gifted 
beyond most of their fellow men, were a little bit 
cracked in the head, and altogether unsafe. That, 
we know, is the charitable view which is taken by 
conventional folk that have not been able to under- 
stand or to agree with them. Be that as it may, 
they all in their day and generation stood for the 
sort of thing that Gorky and Madame Andreiva 
stand for to-day." 

An instance nearer home and in some way more 
interesting than Gorky's is that of Ferdinand P. 
Earle. This gentleman, a wealthy artist and social- 
ist of Monroe, N. Y., was, whilst studying art in 
Paris, married to a French lady. But in June, 1907, 
he discovered that not she, though his legal wife, 
was his affinity, but a certain Miss Kuttner, with 
whom he was associated in socialistic work. To her, 
he found out, he was married already before they 
were born. Having explained to his wife this con- 
dition of their matrimonial relations and having 
induced her to separation, he sent her with their 



The Family Under Socialism 223 



two-year-old son, Harold, back to France, there to 
obtain a divorce and thus to make a legal marriage 
with his "affinity" possible. When these proceed- 
ings became known, not only a disagreeable discus- 
sion followed in the press, but also a very clearly 
outspoken indignation among his townspeople in 
Monroe. The socialists, as they are used to do on 
such occasions, came forth to rescue their persecuted 
comrade. Mr. Earle had stated that he did not be- 
lieve in free-love. But to this his defenders paid no 
attention. And rightly so. For affinity and mar- 
riage before birth are too plainly but the invention 
of blind love. Hence they grounded his justifica- 
tion on the rights of free-love, alleging that mar- 
riage is a private contract, that it must be cemented 
by love alone, that when love grows cold, it 
becomes immoral and must be dissolved, and 
that according to this rule and standard marital 
relations will and must be regulated in future 
society. 

Such was the view taken by the "New Yorker 
Volkszeitung" in its daily issue September 10, 
1907, and in its weekly edition, September 15. 
"The Worker," September 14, 1907 had a defense 
of Mr. Earle written by Leonard D. Abbott in 
which we read : 

"This is likely to become a historic case. In the 
long stretch of the centuries the marriage institu- 
tion is constantly in process of modification. It is 
evolving toward something higher. Upon certain 



224 Ethics of the Family 



individuals the brunt of this evolutionary process 
falls. They become, by sheer force of temperament 
and circumstances, the scapegoats who have to carry 
the disgrace and odium attaching to new moral 
standards, imperfectly understood. Ferdinand 
Earle is such a one." 

"Let us never forget that all the hubbub in this 
now famous case has come from the newspapers, 
the public, and from outraged sentiment. The 
three parties immediately concerned are friends, 
and are acting in mutual agreement. All three be- 
lieve that marriage may rightly be dissolved when 
the two parties to the marriage contract so decide. 
They feel that it is immoral to perpetuate the husk 
of a relation, when the essence is gone. I think that 
the future will vindicate that position." 

"Goethe, Shelley, Byron, Richard Wagner, all 
trampled on conventional moral codes much more 
defiantly than Earle has done. The world has jus- 
tified them. I venture to prophesy that, in years to 
come, it will justify Earle." 

The outcome of F. P. Earle's marriage was a sad 
disappointment to the patrons of free-love. Very 
soon the espoused affinity complained of ill-treat- 
ment by the once love-crazed husband and, before 
two years of matrimonial life had elapsed, she 
asked in court for divorce from him on the plea of 
insanity. 

The most remarkable free-love marriage, how- 
ever, which America has witnessed is that of the 



The Family Under Socialism 225 



most eloquent advocate of pure and lofty moral- 
ity in the Socialist Party — George D. Herron with 
Miss Carrie Rand. 

G. D. Herron was at one time a minister of the 
Congregational Church in Burlington, la., and la- 
ter Professor of Applied Christianity at Grinnell 
University. The foundation of this chair by Mrs. 
E. D. Rand had for its purpose the development 
of social philosophy and economics from the teach- 
ings of Christ. Whilst professing this science, he 
together with Rev. William Bliss and Professor 
R. T. Ely promoted "Christian Socialism." In the 
summer of 1894, he with Professor Ely organized 
at Chautauqua, N. Y., the "American Institute of 
Christian Sociology," which was designed to fur- 
nish literature and propaganda for the Christian so- 
cialist movement. But as his teachings were found 
to be in conflict with the views of the university, he 
was forced by the authorities to resign, and his 
chair was abolished. His resignation also put an 
end for the moment to the movement of Christian 
socialism in America. In 1900 G. D. Herron made 
an open declaration for revolutionary socialism at a 
mass meeting held by the Socialist Democratic 
Party in Chicago, and since that time, having com- 
pletely severed his connection with the Church, has 
thrown himself with heart and soul into the work 
of the Socialist Party.* 

*Hillquit. History of Socialism in the United States, p. 321. 
Goldstein. Socialism, pp. 256, 258. 



226 



Ethics of the Family 



One year before his ordination as a minister of 
the Congregational Church, Herron married Miss 
Mary Everhard of Ripon, Wis. Her faithfulness 
was always unequivocally and warmly acknowl- 
edged by him. Five children were born of their 
union. Nevertheless he was divorced from her on 
March 21, 1901 and in the following May married 
Miss Carrie Rand, the daughter of the foundress 
of his chair at Grinnell University and a member 
of his congregation in Burlington. The Congrega- 
tional Church of Grinnell called a council to advise 
concerning the membership and ministerial position 
of Herron. It convened on June 3, 1901 and was 
attended by ten churches. A committee appointed 
presented a statement in which it was maintained, 
that the divorce proceedings, while brought in the 
name of Mrs. Herron as plaintiff, were in fact in- 
stituted by Mr. Herron and against her wish and 
protest; that divorce was granted by the court in 
Algona, la., because Mr. Herron had without 
cause and excuse deserted his wife and was guilty 
of such cruel and inhuman treatment as seriously 
to impair her health and endanger her life; 
and that for nine years before the divorce was 
granted he had been on terms of friendship and 
intimate association with Miss Carrie Rand. The 
Council found Herron guilty of "immoral and 
unchristian conduct" and excluded him from the 
Church and the ministry of the Gospel; which 
sentence, however, it did not pronounce with- 



The Family Under Socialism 22 7 



out having given him a chance of defending 
himself.* 

For this purpose G. D. Herron had sent a letter 
to the Grinnell Church Committee dated New 
York, May 24, 1901. In this he denied neither his 
divorce from his former wife nor his association 
with Miss Carrie Rand, but justified his conduct on 
two grounds. The first was the immorality of mod- 
ern marriage, a passage referring to which we have 
already quoted in the preceding chapter. The 
other ground was the morality of free-love. His 
views on this point are for us at present of para- 
mount interest and deserve to be reproduced in his 
own words. 

"I thoroughly believe in the vital and abiding 
union of one man with one woman as a true basis 
of the family. But we shall have few such unions 
until we have a free family. Men and women must 
be economically free — free to use their powers to 
the fullest extent — free from interference of legal 
and ecclesiastical force, and free to correct their 
mistakes, before we can have a family that is noble, 
built on unions that are good. Lives that are essen- 
tially one, co-operative in the love and truth that 
make oneness, need no law of state or church to 
bind or keep them together. Upon such, the impo- 
sition of force is a destruction and a blasphemy. 
On the other hand, no law in the universe has a 
right to keep together those who are not vitally and 

*Goldstein. Socialism, pp. 257, 263; 287. 288. 



228 



Ethics of the Family 



essentially one. It is only in freedom that love can 
find its own, or truth blossom in the soul, or other 
than a slave-individuality unfold. It is the business 
of society to see to it that every child is surrounded 
by full and free resources of a complete life; it is 
the business of society to see to its own fatherhood 
and motherhood of every child, as well as to hold 
every parent responsible; it is the business of soci- 
ety to know every child of woman as a free and 
legitimate child of God and welcome it as an in- 
heritor of the reverence (revenues?) and resources 
of the earth ; but it is not the business of society to 
unite and separate man and woman in marriage re- 
lation. Love must be set free and liberty must be 
trusted, if noble and beautiful homes are to spring 
up to make the earth a garden of truth and glad- 
ness. The coercive family system is filling the earth 
with falsehood and hypocrisy, misery and soul-dis- 
integration, and is perpetuating the morality of 
slaves and liars. In times past, men have thrown 
away their lives in protest against what seemed to 
them tyranny and wrong. There is a new world 
coming whose way can be made ready only by those 
who will throw away their good names and accept, 
perhaps, everlasting disgrace, as the price of their 
protest. And if I willingly accept all the obloquy 
and retribution which church and society may 
visit upon me, in making a protest against a 
system that seems to me destructive to all true 
morality, and to the very citadel of the soul's 



The Family Under Socialism 229 



integrity, then my protest has earned its right to be 
heard."* 

G. D. Herron's marriage with Miss Carrie 
Rand, we must infer, was a free-love marriage. As 
such it was, indeed, announced in New York City, 
May 25, 1 90 1, on the morrow of the day on 
which the letter to the Grinnell Church com- 
mittee was written. Leonard D. Abbott gives, in 
the "International Socialist Review," July, 1901, 
under the caption 4 A Socialist Marriage,' a re- 
port of its celebration; from which we quote ver- 
batim : 

"We were gathered together, we of the inner 
circle of comradeship, on the last Saturday evening 
in May. . . . The fragrance and blossoms of 
spring flowers seemed to transform our rooms into 
a fairy garden, and the strains of a primitive love 
melody, as they drifted to us, were full of mystery 
and love. 

"Our comrade, George D. Herron, arose, care- 
worn and sorrowful as one who has passed through 
the valley of the Shadow of Death, yet strong- 
hearted and gladsome withal; and beside him stood 
Carrie Rand, clad in pure vestal white and bearing 
lilies-of-the-valley in her hand. 'We believe, 
friends, in fellowship,' he said, 'and because w T e be- 
lieve that fellowship is life we have asked a few of 
you to let us share with you the fellowship and 
sacrament of the unity of life which we wish to now 
*Int. Soc. Rev. July 1901. pp. 23, 24. 



230 



Ethics of the Family 



announce to you. For many years this unity of life 
has made us one in fact, but now we wish this unity 
to become manifest unto the world, and it is to 
announce to you this marriage of our souls, which 
is to us a reality before the foundation of the 
world* and which we can conceive of as having no 
ending, that we have asked you to kindly come to- 
gether to-night.' 

"Miss Rand responded: 'This is the day and 
hour which we have chosen to announce to you and 
the world our spiritual union, which is a fact in the 
heart of God.' 

"The host of the evening, Dr. Charles Brodie 
Patterson, editor of the Arena and Mind, next 
made a brief address. Dr. Patterson was followed 
by the Rev. William Thurston Brown of Plymouth 
Church, Rochester, whose 'Annunciation Service' 
was a poem in prose. It seemed entirely fitting that 
this tried and true comrade, whose best labor and 
thought for many years has been given to the so- 
cialist cause, should be here to participate in the 
dedication of these two lives to the socialist move- 
ment. He said (in part) : 

" 'That which calls us here to-day is a sacrament. 
Not in any conventional sense, but in the elemental 
significance of the word — a significance which re- 
flects the mind and being of the Eternal and the In- 
finite. Nowhere has the religious institution so 

*This is still more wonderful than Ferdinand P. Earle's 
marriage with Miss Kuttner before their birth. 



The Family Under Socialism 231 

nearly approached the frontiers of vital truth as in 
conceiving marriage to be a sacrament. But no- 
where has it departed so far from all that is divine 
and ennobling as in supposing that any word of 
priest or prelate can be sacramental. Neither stat- 
ute nor official, civil or religious, can ever create 
this sacred thing. Neither has it the smallest sanc- 
tion to give to that which is sacred, if at all, by the 
supreme fiat of a pure and perfect love. The divine 
is not in legislature or council, church or state. It 
abides for ever in human life. Human life alone in- 
carnates God — and laws and civilizations are toler- 
able only in the measure of their recognition and 
service of that life. 

" 'We are not here to establish a relationship 
which otherwise would not have been. We are not 
here to inaugurate or consummate a marriage. No 
words of ours or any one's can add to or take 
from the truth and solemnity of the divine fact of a 
reciprocal love uniting soul to soul by a sanction in 
presence of which all human enactments seem pro- 
fane and impertinent, for this is the supreme sacra- 
ment of human experience. There is something 
about it which transcends all other things and pro- 
claims its inherent divinity. 

" 'Inasmuch, therefore, as George D. Herron and 
Carrie Rand are thus united together by the bond 
of a reciprocal love, I announce that they are hus- 
band and wife by every law of right and truth, and 
I bespeak for them the fervent benediction of all 



232 



Ethics of the Family 



true souls and the abiding gladness that dwells in 
the heart of God for ever/ 

"As Comrade Brown had concluded, Mrs. Rand 
stepped forward, kissed George D. Herron and his 
bride, and, with a voice trembling with emotion, 
invoked blessing on their marriage. 

"Each of the fourteen guests present was now 
invited to make a verbal offering to the consumma- 
tion of this love union. Richard Le Galienne, a 
poet famous in two continents, spoke first. 

" 'All the friends that Mr. and Mrs. Herron 
love/ he said, 'will love them forever, and will 
love them all the better because they have had the 
courage to stand up and say that they love each 
other and that love is all the marriage they need. I 
feel very honored that I had the opportunity of 
being present on this occasion, and only wish that 
I had had longer notice, in order to have prepared 
an epithalamium worthy of its dignity.' 

"Two of the Social democratic comrades spoke 
next, emphasizing the fact that the marriage 
meant, above all, more complete consecration to 
socialism. 

"The last speaker was Franklin H. Wentworth. 
'Having shared the joy and sorrow, the trials and 
problems, of my comrades here,' he said, 'it is per- 
haps fitting that I should say the last word on this 
occasion, and that this word should be a word of 
personal affection and comradeship. And yet I must 
confess that the feeling of joy I have to-night re- 



The Family Under Socialism 233 



lates not so directly to them as to the cause, in the 
service of which we are all enlisted. ... In the 
very fact that so large a number of persons as are 
here assembled can be inspired by the same ideal, 
I see a demonstration that the truth is beginning to 
force its way and dramatize itself in reference to 
every human institution. There seems in the gather- 
ing of such a company a hint of the dawning of 
the day when the spirit of freedom shall rule the 
world — freedom of the body, and freedom of the 
soul/ 

"The gathering broke up and finally, as a sweet 
benediction, the bride herself took her seat at the 
piano and played to us for awhile, pouring out her 
soul in the interpretation of one of Beethoven's 
greatest sonatas, and as she played, the memory of 
a ghoulish press of human vultures, of slave mar- 
riage, of cruel capitalism, was blotted out. We saw 
only the New Life of Socialism, when the love that 
made this union holy shall be the only basis of mar- 
riage, and when this love, stretching out, shall em- 
brace the common life of the world."* 

Was not marriage plainly declared at this wed- 
ding feast to be independent of any civil or ecclesi- 
astical law or authority? Was not free-love openly 
proclaimed as the only valid marriage bond, nay, 
was it not termed the only sacrament hallowing and 
consecrating matrimony, extolled as the only source, 
from which the right matrimonial relations can 

*Int. Soc. Rev. July 1901. pp. 14-20. 



234 



Ethics of the Family 



spring, glorified as pre-eminently sacred and di- 
vinely sublime, as an efflux of the Eternal and In- 
finite (immanent in the world) ? Was not free-love 
regarded moreover as essentially connected with 
socialism, as a more complete consecration to it, as 
a dedication to the socialist movement, and did not 
the wedding-feast present itself to the inner circle 
as a "vision of the New Life of Socialism, when 
the love that made this union holy shall be the only 
basis of marriage" ? 

G. D. Herron's feast found approbation far be- 
yond the inner circle in New York City. When his 
divorce and re-marriage were discussed in the press, 
there were no socialist voices heard that reproved 
him, but many that defended him and endorsed the 
principle on which he acted. The Haverhill "So- 
cial Democrat" July 2, said: 

"Herron has been quoted by the capitalist press 
as saying that he does not believe that the present 
marriage system is sacred or good. We repeat the 
same. The truth cannot be avoided even when deal- 
ing with questions of a most delicate nature." 

"The marriage system to-day is based on impur- 
ity, on ignorance and on a big lie. People marry 
not for love; therefore modern marriage cannot be 
sacred."* 

When the San Francisco "Call" had accused 
G. D. Herron and his friends of "viewing mar- 
riage loosely" and of "attempting to cancel the line 

*Quoted by Goldstein. Socialism, p. 281. 



The Family Under Socialism 235 



that divides honesty from dishonesty," the " 'Ad- 
vance,' the Official Organ of the Socialists of the 
Pacific Coast," held him up as a man who dared 
and dares to speak and live the truth.* 

After an ovation which had been given to G. D. 
Herron at a lecture, the "Worker," May 19, 1901, 
said: 

"The welcome received came not alone as a trib- 
ute to the man who has been on the firing line of 
the Social Revolution for several weeks, the vic- 
tim of a pitiless persecution by an unscrupulous 
enemy, but also as an endorsement of the principles 
for the promulgation of which he has undoubtedly 
been made to suffer."f 

In the issue of the "Worker," June 16, 1901, 
G. D. Herron's marriage is termed "morally and 
legally correct.":): 

In a lecture delivered by W. T. Brown in the 
Plymouth Church, New York, and reported by the 
"Social Democrat," Haverhill, Mass., May 4, 
1 90 1, G. D. Herron is called the greatest prophet 
of modern times, who came from Minnesota to 
Burlington with a message which the world must 
hear and reckon with. Nay, he is likened to the 
divine Redeemer Himself. § 

David Goldstein is witness to the fact that just 

*Quoted. Ibid. pp. 281,282. 
f Quoted. Ibid. p. 282. 
t Quoted. Ibid. p. 284. 
§Ibid. pp. 289, 290. 



236 



Ethics of the Family 



at the time when this sentiment of admiration for 
G. D. Herron was sweeping through the socialist 
press, the then editor of the Haverhill "Socialist 
Democrat," while addressing a public meeting in 
Boston, referred to him as the second Christ.* 

The free-love marriage of G. D. Herron is in 
every respect of marked significance. 

It met with the highest approval of the leaders 
of socialism and found in the socialist press public 
recognition; it was not only justified in principle, 
but glorified and clothed with all the luster that 
could render it sacred and attractive in the eyes of 
the world, while its connection with the socialist 
movement was unequivocally asserted. 

The facts advanced by us, with the interpreta- 
tion given of them by socialist writers, show to evi- 
dence that free-love marriage is even in this coun- 
try not only approved and put into practice in sev- 
eral individual cases, but also demanded and ex- 
pected to come into general usage. 

*Ibid. p. 292. 

Rev. E. E. Carr, in answering to the attack which Mr. 
Roosevelt in the "Outlook" made against G. D. Herron, dares 
to say that the latter never advocated free love or was a free- 
lover, and that his life history was rather a real tragedy than 
a crime. (Christian Socialist, April 1, 1909.) 

Rives La Monte meets the ex-President with "the bare 
statement of the fact that Mr. Herron was legally divorced 
from his first wife and married to his second wife by a cere- 
mony that is recognized as legal and binding by the laws of 
the State in which it occurred — New York." (Int. Soc. Rev., 
May 1909. p. 839.) 



The Family Under Socialism 237 



It still remains to inquire whether or not the sex- 
ual relations which are to prevail under socialism 
destroy marriage, understanding this in the proper 
sense of the word, as a social institution distinct 
from concubinage or promiscuity. To answer this 
question let us sum up the properties attributed to 
free-love marriage by prominent socialist authori- 
ties. 

First of all, we are told, marriage is a merely 
private affair — subject to absolutely no law, 
whether human or divine; whether civil, religious, 
or moral. 

Secondly, it has directly for its end not the gen- 
eral welfare of the human kind, but the well-being 
of two individuals united by love. Rebel assigns as 
the real object of conjugal union the gratification of 
the natural instinct, and the transmission of one's 
being in the propagation of the race.* The edu- 
cation of offspring, as we shall see presently, is posi- 
tively excluded from the object of wedlock. It 
must indeed be so. 

If marriage had any direct relation to the wel- 
fare of the race, to its proper propagation and edu- 
cation, and if it were not in regard to its end and 
object merely private and personal, socialists could 
not consistently except it, as they do, from law and 
authority. 

Thirdly, husband and wife by the socialist mar- 
riage are absolutely equal and independent of each 
*Woman. p. 87. 



2 3 8 



Ethics of the Family 



other, so that neither of them can claim any author- 
ity over the other, neither is subordinated to the 
other. 

Fourthly, under socialism the real bond of union, 
the marriage tie, does not consist in mutual rights and 
duties, but in sex-love alone, and hence it follows : 

Fifthly, that socialist marriage has no stability 
and indissolubility. For sex-love is of its nature 
changeable and unsteady; hence marriage too, if 
constituted by it, is devoid of firmness and perma- 
nency. 

That sex-love, especially if absolutely free and 
independent, is, as a rule, changeable and whim- 
sical, is proved by the experience of all ages and is 
manifest from its very nature. For it is a passion, 
and a very vehement one, innate in man's organic 
being, and hence shares, like all strong emotions, the 
changes to which the human organism is subject 
from within by its own inherent laws, and from 
without under the influence of environment. Social- 
ists are not wanting who openly grant this fact and 
hence infer the unsteadiness of free-love marriage. 

The German socialist Stern (in his "Thesen 
ueber den Socialismus") , speaking of marriage un- 
der socialism, admits that its purity can not be per- 
fectly realized, and alleges as a reason thereof that 
man's inclinations, changeable as they are, must be 
allowed their free course.* 

*See Dr. Kaeser. "Der Sozialdemokrat Hat das Wort." 
p. 192. 



The Family Under Socialism 239 



Gumplowicz (in his "Ehe und Freie Liebe") 
concedes that neither he nor anybody else can know 
how long marriage contracts based on love alone 
are apt to last in the average, whether for lifetime 
or even less than six months. He guesses that be- 
tween these two extremes indefinitely many grades 
will co-exist, all of which will be regarded as 
legal.* 

All socialists, however, do not agree with this 
view. Not a few of them maintain that love, once 
freed from economic influence and unconstrained 
by law, will gain a superior, nay a divine strength, 
so as to effect a lasting and inseparable union be- 
tween spouse and bridegroom. G. D. Herron, in 
his letter to the Grinnell Church Committee, ex- 
presses his belief in a vital and abiding union of 
one man with one woman as a true basis of the 
family, but denies that such unions are generally 
possible otherwise than by free-love. 

In the speeches delivered in the inner circle, 
where G. D. Herron celebrated his marriage feast, 
the union effected by free-love was termed spiritual 
— a divine sacrament, a divine fact, a fact in the 
heart of God; and it was maintained that there was 
something about it which transcends all other 
things and proclaims its inherent divinity, some- 
thing sacred and divine, because the human life in- 
carnates God. 

These are, indeed, tender and lofty poetical ef- 
*Cf. Ibid. p. 199. 



240 Ethics of the Family 



fusions, but they can not do away with the stern 
realities of human life, nor can they undo the sad 
experience which mankind has had concerning hu- 
man passions in general and that of sex-love in 
particular. Moreover, idealistic as they are, they 
sound rather absurd in the mouths of genuine so- 
cialists, who openly and unreservedly profess their 
belief in materialism and in the materialistic con- 
ception of history. Materialism and idealism are 
irreconcilable. From a mere organism, as man is 
supposed by materialists to be, from merely ma- 
terial forces and influences, beyond which nothing 
is admitted to exist, it is impossible to develop 
moral qualities and powers of a spiritual nature, 
much less a divine life. Again the passion of sex- 
love, which is essentially bodily and organic, if it 
is granted full freedom and is exempted from law, 
can not, according to its nature, become spiritual, 
but must needs wax ever lower, coarser and more 
licentious. G. D. Herron's and W. T. Brown's 
idealistic views can have a palpable meaning only in 
the supposition that they are taken in a pantheistic 
acceptation. But so understood they present an- 
other absurdity. For then they would imply that 
sex-love in its full and free development, that is, 
the very passion by which man is nearest to the 
brute, and which obeys reason only reluctantly, is 
identical with the supreme and infinite life of the 
deity. 

According to all principles of reason and all ex- 



The Family Under Socialism 241 



perience, then, free sex-love can not give firmness 
and stability to marriage, but, on the contrary, if 
made the bond of union, renders it dissolvable at 
any time and by any stronger impulse of passion. 

This being the case, how shall we specify the so- 
cialist marriage, which is subject to no law, implies 
no duties, has no principle of unity and authority, 
no end that refers to the general well-being of the 
human race, no permanence and stability ? No doubt, 
these are altogether new sexual relations. Certainly 
we can not call them marriage, which in its com- 
mon and proper acceptation is a lasting union of 
male and female for the purpose of propagating 
and educating the human race. It seems to come 
in its conception, nearest to restricted promiscuity. 
For under its laws, one man may at the same time 
enter into union with only one woman, but he may, 
as passion bids him, dissolve his union, and unite 
successively with any other woman. So, likewise, 
may one woman simultaneously unite with only one 
man, but may in the same manner successively unite 
with any other man, her former connections not- 
withstanding. 

It would not seem that socialists could with good 
reason protest against this specification of their 
marriage. For Bebel* tells us, and others repeat 
his assertion, that man in his final development will 
return to the starting point, that is, to the primitive 
condition of mankind, the return, however, being 
*Woman. p. 347. 



242 



Ethics of the Family 



effected upon an infinitely higher social plane than 
that from which he started. This general rule has 
been applied to the relation between man and 
woman in particular.* Now there was originally 
promiscuity. Consequently the new sexual rela- 
tions under socialism will be promiscuity on a 
higher plane. 

Section IV 

Parental Society under Socialism 

Marriage is the first of all societies. It results 
immediately from nature, and from it grow and 
develop the other societies which make up the 
family, which, in its turn, is the unit of the State. 
What shall become under socialism of the societies 
constituting the family, if marriage be abolished 
and in its place a refined and restricted promiscuity 
of the sexes be introduced? The question es- 
pecially concerns parental society, the society 7 of 
parents and children, which has for its purpose the 
physical, intellectual, and moral education of the 
latter. As soon as offspring is born, it arises by 
force of natural necessity from conjugal society, 
conceived as a lasting union of man and woman for 
the purpose of propagating and educating the hu- 
man race. Yes, what will become of this society 7 , if 
marriage, its natural basis, shall be overthrown in 
*Woman. p. 343. 



The Family Under Socialism 243 



future society? Socialist philosophers give us a 
very plain answer. Children under socialism do not 
belong to their parents, but to society, and are not 
to be brought up by them, but by the community. 
This undoubtedly is tantamount to saying that pa- 
rental society will disappear together with the sta- 
ble monogamous family. 

We have already quoted passages from socialist 
authors which contain such contentions; here we 
only recall them to the mind of the reader: 

"The care and education of children," said En- 
gels, "becomes a public matter. Society cares 
equally well for all children, legal or illegal." 

Hyndman expressed the opinion that marriage 
for life and responsibility for children born in wed- 
lock is almost at an end even now and must end in 
a widely extended communism. According to Bax 
"the transformation of the present family-form, 
founded as it is on the economic dependence of 
woman, the maintenance of the young and the aged 
falling on individuals rather than on the commu- 
nity, etc., into a freer, more real, and therefore a 
higher form must inevitably follow the economic 
revolution."* 

Herron in his letter to the Committee of the 
Grinnell Church asserted : 

"It is the business of society to see to it that 
every child is surrounded by the full and free re- 
sources of a complete life; it is the business of so- 

*See above, p. 126. 



244 



Ethics of the Family 



ciety to see to its own fatherhood and motherhood, 
as well as to hold every parent responsible; it is the 
business of society to know every child of woman 
as a free and legitimate child of God and welcome 
it as an inheritor of the resources of the earth."* 

Similarly B. Bax and W. Morris maintained 
that with the advent of social economic freedom 
"property in children would cease to exist and every 
infant that came into the world would be born into 
full citizenship and would enjoy all its advantages, 
whatever the conduct of the parents might be."f 

Bebel states the socialist view on this point most 
clearly and positively, when he says : 

"One of the principal tasks of the new social 
system will be the education of the rising genera- 
tion in keeping with its improved opportunities. 
Every child that is born, be it male or female, is a 
welcome addition to society. Society sees therein 
the prospect of its own perpetuity, of its own future 
development. It, therefore, also realizes the duty 
of providing for the new being according to its best 
powers.":): 

W. Morris, in a letter to Rev. W. Sharman, 
Preston, England, denies to parents both the right 
and the ability to educate their children. 

"As to the matter of education," says he, "it is 
after all a difficult one to settle, until people's ideas 

*See above, p. 147. 
fSee above, p. 135. 
X Woman, p. 324. 



The Family Under Socialism 245 



of the family are much changed; but in the mean- 
time here is the problem : How is it possible to pro- 
tect the immature citizen from the whims of his 
parents? Are they to be left free to starve his 
body or warp his mind by all sorts of nonsense; if 
not, how are they to be restrained? You see that 
one supposes in a reasonable community that ex- 
perience will have taught the community some wis- 
dom in such matters; but the parents may, and 
probably will, lack this experience. Well, then, 
hasn't the young citizen a right to claim his share 
of the advantages which the community has 
evolved? Must he be under the tyranny of two 
accidental persons? At present the law says yes, 
which means that the young citizen is the property 
of two accidental persons. 

''Putting myself in the position of the imma- 
ture citizen, I protest against this unfairness." 
"On the whole, experience has shown me that the 
parents are the ////fittest persons to educate a child; 
and I entirely deny their right to do so, because 
that would interfere with the right of the child, as 
a member of the community from its birth to enjoy 
all the advantages which the community can give it. 
Of course, so far as grown people are concerned, I 
quite agree with your view of complete freedom 
to teach anything that any one will listen to. But 
for children I feel that they have as much need for 
a revolution as the proletarians have."* 
*Quoted by D. Goldstein. Socialism, pp. 234, 235. 



246 



Ethics of the Family 



H. G. Wells writes in the "Independent," New 
York, November 1, 1906: 

"Socialism involves the responsible citizenship of 
women, their independence of men and all the per- 
sonal freedom that follows. It intervenes between 
the children and the parents, claiming to support 
them, protect them and educate them for its ampler 
purposes. Socialism, in fact, is the state family. 
The old family of the private individual must van- 
ish before it, just as the old water-works of private 
enterprise, or the old gas company. They are in- 
compatible with it. Socialism assails the trium- 
phant egotism of the family to-day just as Christi- 
anity did in its earlier and more vital centuries. So 
far as English Socialism is concerned (and the 
thing is still more the case in America) , I must con- 
fess that the assault has displayed a quite extraor- 
dinary instinct for taking cover, but it is a question 
of tactics rather than of essential antagonism." 

"It is possible to believe that so far as the middle 
classes are concerned, this discretion, this delicacy, 
has been carried altogether too far. Socialists 
would have forwarded their cause better if they 
had been more outspoken. The middle class 
family, I am increasingly convinced, is in a state of 
tension. I believe that a modest but complete state- 
ment of the Socialist criticism of the family, and the 
proposed Socialist substitute for the conventional 
relationship, might awaken extraordinary responses 
at the present time." 



The Family Under Socialism 247 



Bebel likewise insists on the insufficiency of the 
parents for education as required by our advanced 
age.* 

If wedlock has to be dissolved as soon as sex-love 
ceases between husband and wife, and if the bring- 
ing up of offspring is not one of the principal ob- 
jects of this union, the transfer of the duty of edu- 
cation from parents to society is a necessary part of 
the socialist system. Who else but the community 
should take care of children born in extreme phys- 
ical and moral need? And besides, in what manner 
could socialists better obtain an opportunity of in- 
graining their principles on the future generation 
than by claiming for their commonwealth the ex- 
clusive right of educating youth? 

Bebel draws up a complete system of communis- 
tic education to be imparted in the future socialist 
society. 

The child is to be taken care of even before its 
birth, by providing for the mother. 

"The first object of its (the society's) attention 
must be the one that gives birth to the new being 
— the mother. A comfortable home ; agreeable sur- 
roundings and provisions of all sorts, requisite for 
this stage of maternity; a careful nursing — such are 
the first requirements. The mother's breast must 
be preserved for the child as long as possible and 
necessary. This is obvious."f 

•Woman, pp. 326, 327. 
flbid. p. 324. 



248 



Ethics of the Family 



Then follows physical and mental education in 
public playgrounds, kindergartens and schools. 

"So soon as in the society of the future the child 
has grown up, it falls in with other children of its 
own age for play, and under common surveillance. 
All that can be furnished for its mental and physi- 
cal culture is at hand, according to the measure of 
general intelligence." 

"The playgrounds and kindergartens are fol- 
lowed by a playful introduction into the prelimi- 
naries of knowledge and of the various manual oc- 
cupations. This is followed up by agreeable mental 
and physical work, connected with gymnastic exer- 
cises and free play in the skating rink and swim- 
ming establishments ; drills, wrestling and exercises 
for both sexes follow and supplement one another. 
The aim is to raise a healthy, hardy, physically and 
mentally developed race. Step by step follow the 
induction of the youth in the various practical pur- 
suits — manufacturing, horticulture, agriculture, the 
technique of the process of production, etc. ; nor is 
the development of the mind neglected in the sev- 
eral branches of sciences." 

"The knowledge of natural things, introduced in 
a natural way, will spur the desire for knowledge in- 
finitely more than a system of education in which 
one subject is at odds with another; and each can- 
cels the other, as, for instance, when 'religion' is 
taught on one hand, and on the other natural sci- 
ences and natural history. The equipment of the 



The Family Under Socialism 



249 



school rooms and educational establishment is in 
keeping with the high degree of culture of the new 
social order. All the means of education and of 
study, clothing and support are furnished by so- 
ciety; no pupil is at disadvantage with another." 

"The parents themselves have the regulation of 
education in their hands ; it is they who determine 
the measures that shall be adopted and introduced. 
We are then living in a thoroughgoing democratic 
society. The Boards of Education, which will exist, 
of course, are made up of the parents themselves — 
men and women — and those following the educa- 
tional profession. Does any one imagine that they 
will act against their interests?" 

But in these boards, one might remark, the ma- 
jority will decide, and the boards themselves in all 
probability will not consist of all parents, but of 
their representatives. Hence the wishes and the 
interests of individual parents may in the co-opera- 
tive commonwealth be neglected and counteracted 
just as well as they are in the modern town or city 
school-boards. 

"Education must also be equal and in common 
for both sexes. Their separation is justifiable only 
in the cases where the difference in sex makes such 
separation absolutely necessary." 

"The Socialist system of education, properly reg- 
ulated and ordered and placed under the direction 
of a sufficient force, continues up to the age when 
society shall determine that its youth shall enter 



250 



Ethics of the Family 



upon their majority. Both sexes are fully qualified 
to exercise all the rights and fill all the duties that 
society demands from its adult members. Society 
now enjoys the certainty of having brought up only 
thorough, fully developed members, human beings 
to whom nothing natural is strange, as familiar with 
their nature as with the nature and condition of 
society which they join full-righted."* 

Bebel's educational system is no mere theoretical 
conception. The socialist programs and platforms 
in their immediate demands are both an endorse- 
ment of the principles on which it is based, and an 
attempt to carry it out as far as the present social 
conditions allow, in order to prepare for its full ex- 
ecution in the future society. About this there can 
be no doubt. 

The "Program of the Social Democratic Federa- 
tion" in England, (revised in 1893) calls for "free 
secular and technical education compulsory on all 
classes, together with free maintenance for the 
children in boarding schools." The Erfurt Pro- 
gram advocates "secularization of the schools, 
compulsory attendance at the public schools, in- 
struction, use of all means of instruction (books, 
etc.) , and board free of charge in all public elemen- 
tary schools, and in the higher institutions of learn- 
ing for such pupils of both sexes as, on account of 
their talents, are judged fit for higher studies." 

The Indianapolis platform of the Socialist Party 
*Woman. pp. 325-330- 



The Family Under Socialism 251 



of America, in general, demands the education of 
all children up to the age of eighteen years, and 
State or municipal aid for books, clothing and 
food. 

In the National Convention of the Socialist 
Party in Chicago, 1904, the Committee on the 
State and Municipal Program proposed the fol- 
lowing suggestions as "a preliminary basis for the 
activity of the Socialist members in State legisla- 
tures and local administrations." 

"Freedom of speech and expression of opinion 
by teachers and students." 

"Free textbooks for teachers and pupils, uni- 
form textbooks on all subjects to be furnished free 
to public schools, and to private schools on re- 
quest." 

"The choice of textbooks to be left to a commit- 
tee of teachers and students in all institutions above 
the grade of high schools." 

"In history and economics, the proletarian stand- 
point to receive equal consideration with the capital- 
ist standpoint." 

"Compulsory education for both sexes up to the 
age of eighteen years." 

"Co-education in all branches of science, and 
manual training for both sexes to be continued 
throughout all grades." 

"Extension of the public school system to as- 
sure equal educational opportunities to all classes 
in all branches of learning, public supervision of all 



252 



Ethics of the Family 



educational institutions to secure an equal educa- 
tional standard."* 

If these socialist demands were enacted into 
laws, religion and the Church would be excluded 
from the public school, and, where compulsory at- 
tendance at public schools should be generally pre- 
scribed by law, from all educational institutions 
without exception. The Church, as Kautsky rea- 
sons, ought in fact to be excluded from all schools. 

"If religion is a private concern, . . . then 
the school is in consequence a purely secular insti- 
tution. . . . To mix up instruction of the chil- 
dren with religious affairs would be a fundamental 
error. Therefore the co-operation of ecclesiastical 
persons in the work of instruction is inadmissible. "f 

That by such a system of education religious lib- 
erty is infringed on, is not admitted by Bax; on the 
contrary, religious teaching by the Church must, in 
his opinion, be suppressed in the name of true lib- 
erty of conscience. He says: 

"The freedom to hold and to propound any 
proposition, however absurd, as a theory to be 
judged of, and rejected or accepted at the bar of 
Reason, is quite another thing from the liberty of 
the 'hot gospeller,' who claims to hold a specula- 
tive pistol to the ear of the ignorant and weak- 
minded people by threatening them with damnation 
if they reject his teaching. The one is of the essence 

*Int Soc. Rev. May 1904. pp. 679-681. 

f Quoted by V. Cathrein. Socialism, p. 64. Footnote. 



The Family Under Socialism 253 



of real liberty, the other is the vampire of a dead 
liberty of conscience, which was only living and 
real when it was opposed to the positive power of 
the representatives of dogma over men's persons 
and lives. As Gabriel Deville well puts it: 'The 
aim of collectivity is to assure liberty to each, un- 
derstanding by this the means of self-development 
and action, since there can be no liberty where there 
is material or moral incapacity of consciously ex- 
ercising the faculty of will. . . . To permit by 
religious practices the cerebral deformation of chil- 
dren is in reality a monstrous violation of liberty 
of conscience, which can only become effective un- 
der the proscription of what at present passes mus- 
ter for religious liberty, the odious license in favor 
of some to the detriment of all.' The vampire, 
bourgeois liberty of conscience, must in short be 
impaled, before true liberty of conscience can be- 
come a healthy living reality."* 

After these explanations it will not be difficult to 
form an idea of the education to be given in the 
co-operative commonwealth and in general in any 
society where socialism is to rule after the seizure 
of public power. It is to be imparted to children 
from their tenderest years by appointed nurses, 
teachers, and officials, devoid of parental love and 
affection, on the plan of collective production. The 
instruction included in it must be exclusively secular, 
in harmony with socialist science, hence anti-Chris- 
* Relig ion of Socialism, pp. 114, 115. 



254 



Ethics of the Family 



tian, godless, materialistic, pointing to no other end 
of human life than temporal welfare and earthly 
enjoyments, inculcating boundless love of freedom 
and independence instead of submission to law and 
authority, whether divine or human, civil or do- 
mestic. 

Furthermore, socialistic society, since it claims 
exclusive teaching authority, renders instruction in 
any other doctrine and the imparting of any prin- 
ciples other than its own absolutely impossible, im- 
poses its tenets and views on all with irresistible 
necessity and enforces invariable uniformity in the 
training and developing of all minds. Is this liberal 
promotion of general mental culture or is it tyranny 
exercised over the mind? 

To come back to our main question — when edu- 
cation has been transferred to the community, is pa- 
rental society still left in existence, or is it even pos- 
sible ? Plainly, it has no longer an object ; for its real 
end, as understood from its very conception, is the 
education of offspring. But any society whatever 
vanishes, when the object for which it is formed 
ceases to be. 

And even if its object did not entirely pass away, 
it could not maintain its existence. Men and women 
being entirely equal in rights, and the latter in no 
way subordinate to the former, as the Erfurt Pro- 
gram demands, it would lack authority and hence 
unity. Besides, children brought up by the socialist 
community through public educators, imbued with 



The Family Under Socialism 



255 



love of freedom and independence, would lose all 
respect for parental authority. A society thus desti- 
tute of submission and subordination, unity and 
organization, could not exist for any length of 
time.* 

There remains still another side of the family 
to be considered, the private household. Will it 
continue under socialism ? There is no reason why 
it should. For the mere purpose of gratifying sex- 
love or of generation, a common household of man 
and woman is not required. It is necessary for the 
rearing of children by both parents and has at all 
times been inseparably connected with it. But un- 
der socialism, education, because it has become a 
function of the community, is no longer imparted 
by parents. Society, consequently, having all pro- 
ductive means in its hands and being entrusted with 
the physical education of children, is also destined 
instead of the parents, to provide the means for 
their sustenance and evolution by a communal ad- 
ministration. 

But where there is no reason for its existence, 
the private household will not come into being. 
Evidently Engels reasons as we do when he writes : 

"With the transformation of the means of pro- 
duction into collective property the monogamous 
family ceases to be the economic unit of society. 
The private household changes to a social industry. 
The care and education of children becomes a pub- 

*Cathrein. Socialism, pp. 340-351. 



256 



Ethics of the Family 



lie matter. Society cares equally for all children, 
legal and illegal."* 

There are, in addition, urgent reasons why the 
private household should not continue under social- 
ism. 

"Woman," as Bebel says and is generally con- 
curred with by socialist writers, "shall be like 
man, a productive and useful member of society, 
equal-righted with him. Precisely like man she 
shall be placed in position to fully develop 
all her physical and mental faculties, to fulfil 
her duties and to exercise her rights. A free 
being and the peer of man, she is safe against 
degradation. "f 

With these rights and this independence of 
woman, it is incompatible that she should keep a 
private household for her husband and the chil- 
dren ; and yet, unless she keep it, a household is im- 
possible. Having equal rights with man, she must 
have also equal duties, and hence also take her 
share in the labor of socialized production. Now, 
if besides this share in common labor, and besides 
the burdens and duties which maternity imposes on 
her, she is to take care of a private household and 
to do most of the work required by it, she has no 
leisure and opportunity left to fulfil her duties 
and exercise her rights in public life, to develop 
equally with man her faculties and acquire higher 

*Origin of the Family, pp. 91, 92. 
fWoman. p. 182. 



The Family Under Socialism 257 



intellectual and artistic accomplishment. She re- 
mains in such a supposition decidedly inferior to 
the man, confined to the house, burdened with 
work, deprived of freedom just as in the gloomy 
era of capitalism. 

Still another reason is urged by Bebel: The 
progress of modern industry and modern ideas 
runs counter to private households. The private 
kitchen is already supplanted by co-operative cook- 
ing, with a large central kitchen and machinery. 
The women attend the work by turns, and meals 
generally come out cheaper, taste better, offer a 
greater variety, and give much less trouble. Thou- 
sands of rich families live the whole year, or a part 
of the year, in boarding houses or hotels, without 
in any way missing the private kitchen. Also the 
central and corresponding steaming arrangements 
for public use, central heating, etc., are found 
highly profitable. The views regarding the natural 
calling of woman for housework have changed; the 
majority of women have discontinued many of 
the former occupations. A revolution has taken 
place in domestic life, by which the position of 
woman in the family is altered. She has become 
freer, more independent. Women nowadays start 
societies for all manner of objects, establish papers, 
call conventions, assemble in trades unions, join the 
organizations of men, have the right of suffrage. 

"The trend, accordingly, of our social life," con- 
cludes Bebel, u is not to banish woman back to the 



258 Ethics of the Family 



house and to the hearth. . . . On the contrary, 
the whole trend of society is to lead woman out of 
the narrow sphere of the strictly domestic life to a 
full participation in the public life of the people — 
a designation that will not then cover the male sex 
only — and in the task of human civilization."* 

As evolution never comes to a standstill, the rev- 
olution of the family must go still farther in future 
society, and the trend to lead out woman from the 
house into public life must finally result in her ex- 
emption from all domestic duties. 

Kautsky in his commentary on the Erfurt Pro- 
gram, Stern and the socialists in general, with but 
few exceptions, fall in with Engels and Bebel. So- 
cialist women like Lily Braun are anxious to see 
this emancipation from the slavery of the house 
carried into effect.f 

What, then, is left of the family? Marriage has 
been replaced by free-love; parental society, when 
education has been transferred to the community, 
no longer exists, and the private household, owing 
to the emancipation of woman from the home, is 
abolished. If all the compound parts are destroyed, 
the whole is annihilated. 

In the face of these facts, the assertion of so- 
cialists that they do not do away with the family, 
but raise it to a higher plane, sounds like irony. 

*Woman. pp. 186, 187. 

fSee V. Cathrein. Stimmen aus Maria Laach. Jahregang 
1907. Heft IV. pp. 387-401. 



PART IV 
Ethics of the State 



CHAPTER I 

IDEA OF THE STATE 

Not only do individuals unite into families, but 
families combine into ever larger aggregates, until 
at last they form one large, self-sufficient, and inde- 
pendent body politic. The motive which leads to 
social unions is fundamentally the same in indi- 
viduals and in families, being always the desire to 
gain by co-operation such means of livelihood and 
well-being as can not be obtained at all or only with 
difficulty by single-handed efforts. Individuals, 
however, unite for the purpose of providing for 
the propagation of their kind, the sustenance of 
their daily life, and the satisfying of their 
immediate needs, but families associate in order 
to procure and ensure all the means necessary 
for perfect well-being as far as it is attainable 
within the limits of this earthly life. Unions of 
individuals, to achieve the former end, constitute 
private associations; the union of families, to at- 
tain the latter, is the State. This common and ob- 
vious conception social science develops into the 

259 



Ethics of the State 



more complete and exact definition : the State is the 
lasting union of families in a perfect and self-suffi- 
cient community, that is, in an independent social 
body sufficient to provide for its members all the 
means necessary for their entire temporal well- 
being. 

The State, if such is its idea and such its end and 
object, must be conceived as having its origin in 
human nature itself. For it is their rational nature 
that irresistibly impels men, taken in their general- 
ity, to strive during their earthly existence after 
ever greater perfection and more complete well- 
being. It is their natural weakness that makes it 
impossible for them to achieve so difficult an object 
by individual efforts; it is their community of na- 
ture that inclines them to friendly intercourse and 
mutual assistance, and their natural faculty of 
speech that enables them to communicate with one 
another ; and finally it is a necessary dictate of their 
reason that commands them to associate and co- 
operate for the attainment of a necessary end which 
they can not obtain singly. 

The State, thus being an institution of nature, 
God is its founder; and for this very reason the 
rights and duties, the juridical relations, by which 
its members are united into one body politic, as also 
the end and object which they must pursue, are not 
determined by the will of men, but by a divine and 
unchangeable law. Likewise, as no society, and 
least of all the State, could pursue its end by the 



Idea of the State 



261 



harmonious co-operation of its members without a 
government, God, when He created man's social 
nature, ordained civil authority for the purpose of 
government, though He did not by the same act 
mark out the subject in which it is to be vested. 

Such was the position of the Church and the 
teaching of philosophy during the whole Christian 
era. But modern liberalism, following in the wake 
of Thomas Hobbes and Jean Jacques Rousseau, at- 
tempted to revolutionize the Christian view. The 
State, it maintains, does not grow out of families 
but of individuals, and does not originate in nature, 
but in the free will of men. Accordingly its object 
is not fixed and necessary, but changeable accord- 
ing to times and circumstances; the juridical rela- 
tions between it and its members are not established 
by a higher law r , but by human agreement; and 
authority is not ordained by God, but created by 
the consent of the governed. Socialism has adopted 
the modern social view, so, however, as to modify 
it by the theory of social evolution and the material- 
istic conception of history. While it admits that 
social life existed with the beginning of the human 
race as an inheritance from animal ancestors, and 
that it was steadily developing throughout the 
course of human history, it maintains that a self- 
sufficient society, aiming at the perfect well-being 
of men, will come into existence only in the period 
of final evolution. The State which now exists and 
has existed for centuries is conceived only as a 



262 



Ethics of the State 



later stage of human development, the stage conse- 
quent on the introduction of private property and 
the struggle between possessing and propertiless 
classes. It will disappear, therefore, as soon as pro- 
ductive goods shall be possessed in common, and 
production carried on under a collective manage- 
ment. Accordingly the present system of social 
ethics also will be abolished, to make room for 
more enlightened views, based on perfect economic 
conditions. 

The socialist theory of civil society was worked 
out by Marx and Engels jointly and laid down in the 
latter's work "The Origin of the Family, Private 
Property and the State," Lewis Morgan's "Ancient 
Society" being taken by them as the starting point 
and basis of their social speculations. 



CHAPTER II 



THE PRIMITIVE FORM OF CIVIL SOCIETY 

For a complete understanding of socialist phi- 
losophers it is necessary to follow up the course of 
social evolution, as explained by them, from its 
very beginning. According to Engels the original 
form of society, common to all barbarians up to the 
time of civilization, was the gentile constitution. 

"Gens in Latin, genos in Greek," says Engels, 
"specially designate that sex organization which 
boasted of common descent (from a common sire) 
and was united into a separate community by cer- 
tain social and religious institutions, but the origin 
and nature of which nevertheless remained obscure 
to all our historians." From recent researches we 
know at present that it originated in time of primi- 
tive men. Among them "it consisted of all indi- 
viduals who by means of the Punaluan marriage 
and in conformity with the conceptions necessarily 
arising in it made up the recognized offspring of a 
certain ancestral mother."* 

As the father was uncertain in this form of 
family, female lineage and maternal right alone 
were valid. 

The gens, as Engels further states, was an insti- 
tution common to all barbarians and is found 
*Origin of the Family, etc. p. 103. 

263 



264 Ethics of the State 

among the American Indians as well as the Greeks, 
Romans, and Germans. 

Among the Iroquois Indians the gentile consti- 
tution had the following essential features. The 
gens elected its sachem, the official head during 
peace, and its chief or leader during war; the 
former, whose office was in a sense hereditary, 
must be selected within the gens; the latter could 
be selected outside. The power of the sachem 
was of a paternal, purely moral nature, without 
means of coercion; the chief had the right to 
command only in times of war. Both the sachem 
and the chief could be retired by the gens at 
will. 

Above them there was in each tribe a council, 
a democratic assembly of all male and female gen- 
tiles of adult age, invested with supreme power. 

All the members of an Iroquois tribe were per- 
sonally free and personally bound to defend each 
other's freedom and to afford to one another help, 
assistance, and protection. All were equal in rights 
and privileges, the sachem and chief claiming in 
this respect no superiority. Thus united, they were 
a brotherhood bound together by the ties of kin, 
and resting on the principle of liberty, equality 
and fraternity. 

Property remained always within the gens; for 
this reason husband and wife could not inherit from 
one another, nor children from their father, for 
nobody was allowed to marry within the gens, and 



The Primitive Form of Civil Society 265 

children did not belong to the gens of the father, 
but to that of the mother. 

Four or more gentes were united into a separate 
group, called phratries by Morgan, and several 
phratries formed a tribe. 

Each tribe had a distinct territory, a distinct 
name, and a distinct dialect, common religious con- 
ceptions and rites, and a common council of the 
sachems and chiefs of the different gentes, who de- 
liberated in public, surrounded by the rest of the 
tribal members. Its functions were solemnly to in- 
vest the sachems and chiefs elected, whom it had 
also a right to depose even against the will of the 
gens, to regulate the relations with foreign tribes, 
to receive and dispatch legations, to declare war and 
make peace. Kindred tribes formed leagues, some- 
times under the pressure of necessity, sometimes 
permanently, thus making the first steps toward the 
formation of nations. 

The gens was thus the social unit; from it the 
whole constitution of gentes, phratries, and tribes 
naturally developed. "All three of them are groups 
of differentiated consanguine relations. Each is 
complete in itself, arranges its own local affairs and 
supplements the other groups. And the cycle of 
functions performed by them includes the aggre- 
gate of the public affairs of men in the lower stage 
of barbarism."* 

"How wonderful," exclaims Engels, "this COn- 
^rigin of the* Family, etc. pp. 103-117. 



266 



Ethics of the State 



stitution is in all its natural simplicity ! No soldiers, 
gensdarmes and policemen, no nobility, kings, re- 
gents, prefects, or judges; no prisons, lawsuits, 
and still affairs run smoothly. All quarrels and dis- 
putes are settled by the entire community involved 
in them. Only in rare cases the blood revenge is 
threatened as an extreme measure. Our capital 
punishment is simply a civilized form of it, afflicted 
with all the advantages and drawbacks of civiliza- 
tion. No vestige of our cumbersome and intricate 
system of administration is needed, although there 
are more public affairs to be settled than nowa- 
days; the communistic household is shared by a 
number of families, the land belongs to the tribe, 
only the gardens are temporarily assigned to the 
households. The parties involved in a question set- 
tle it and in most cases the hundred-year-old tra- 
ditions have settled everything beforehand. There 
cannot be any poor and destitute — the communistic 
households and the gentes know their duties toward 
the aged, sick and disabled. All are free, the 
women included. There is no room yet for slaves, 
nor for the subjugation of foreign tribes." 

"What splendid men and women were produced 
by such a society. All the white men who came 
into contact with unspoiled Indians admired the 
personal dignity, straightforwardness, strength of 
character and bravery of those barbarians." 

"Such was human society and its members, be- 
fore the division into classes had taken place. And a 



The Primitive Form of Civil Society 267 

comparison of that social condition with the condi- 
tion of the overwhelming majority of present day- 
society shows the enormous chasm that separates 
our proletarian and small farmer from the free 
gentile of old."* 

Still this social organization was doomed. It did 
not pass beyond the tribe. The league of tribes 
marked its downfall. 

From the American tribes Engels turns to the 
classical nations of the East. He finds society 
among the latter just as well as among the former 
based on the gentile constitution, though modified 
already in the heroic age. 

"Greeks," he says, "Pelasgians and other na- 
tions of the same tribal origin were constituted on 
the same systematic plan as the Americans: gens, 
phratry, tribe, league of tribes. The phratry might 
be missing, as e.g., among the Dorians; the league 
of tribes might not be fully developed in every 
case ; but the gens was everywhere the unit. At the 
time of their entrance into history, the Greeks were 
on the threshold of civilization. Two full periods 
of evolution are stretching between the Greeks and 
the above named American tribes. The Greeks of 
the heroic age are by so much ahead of the Iroquois. 
For this reason the Grecian gens no longer retains 
the archaic character of the Iroquois gens. The 
stamp of group marriage is rather blurred. Ma- 
ternal law had given way to paternal lineage. Ris- 

*Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 117, 118. 



268 



Ethics of the State 



ing private property thus made its first opening in 
the gentile constitution."* 

The coincidence of the Grecian with the gentile 
constitution in the heroic age is said to be estab- 
lished by the following facts. A system of consan- 
guinity, corresponding to the archaic forms of the 
gens, preserved among the ancient Greeks the mu- 
tual relation of all members of the gens, the gentile 
name having the function of preserving the memory 
of the common descent of its bearers. The phratry, 
which Homer mentions as a military unit, had the 
right and the duty to prosecute the death of a phra- 
tor, had common religious rites and festivals, had 
a common official head, common meetings with 
binding resolutions, common jurisdiction and ad- 
ministration. Kindred phratries formed tribes and 
these again combined into small nations, but in such 
a manner that gentes, phratries, and tribes pre- 
served their full independence. The government 
was carried on by a permanent council (boule), 
the public meeting (agora) , and the military chief. 
The council was originally composed of the gentile 
archons, but was later on, when the number of 
members had become too great, recruited by se- 
lection in such a way that the aristocratic element 
was developed and strengthened. In the public 
meeting every man could demand the word. The 
final vote was taken by hand raising or by acclama- 
tion. The decision thus reached was supreme and 

*Origin of the Family, etc. p. 120. 



The Primitive Form of Civil Society 269 



final. The military chief was the leader of the 
army of the tribe or league, but had as such no civil 
or administrative functions.* 

As deviations from the old gentilism, already ex- 
isting in the heroic age Engels mentions : 

"Paternal law and inheritance of property by the 
father's children, favoring accumulation of wealth 
in the family and giving to the latter a power apart 
from the gens; influence of the difference of wealth 
on the constitution by the formation of the first ru- 
diments of hereditary nobility and monarchy; slav- 
ery, first limited to prisoners of war, but already 
paving the way to the enslavement of tribal 
and gentile associates; degeneration of the old 
feuds between tribes; a regular mode of exist- 
ing by systematic plundering on land and sea 
for the purpose of acquiring cattle, slaves and 
treasures."*)- 

Passing over from Greece to Italy, Engels finds 
the gentile constitution also in ancient Rome. 

"The Roman gens is recognized as an institution 
identical with the Grecian gens. The Grecian gens 
being a continuation of the same social unit, the 
primordial form of which we found among the 
American Indians, the same holds naturally good 
of the Roman gens.":}: 

The gens among the Romans had common burial 

*Ibid. pp. 120-129. 
flbid. pp. 129, 130. 
Jlbid. p. 145. 



270 



Ethics of the State 



ground, common religious rites, a common piece of 
land, the right to adopt strangers and to elect 
chiefs; the gentiles were prohibited to intermarry, 
were obliged to protect and assist another, and had 
the mutual right of inheritance, in accordance, how- 
ever, with paternal law. 

"Ten (Roman) gentes formed a phratry, named 
curia. . . . Every curia had its own religious 
rites, sacred possessions and priests. . . . Ten 
curiae formed a tribe, which probably had orig- 
inally its own elected chief — leader in war and 
high priest — like the rest of the Latin tribes. The 
three tribes together formed the populus Romanus, 
the Roman people." 

According to the first Roman constitution public 
affairs were conducted by the Senate composed of 
the chiefs (elders) of the three hundred gentes. 
The Senate, like the Athenian boule, had to give 
the final decision in many affairs and to undertake 
the preliminary discussion of more important mat- 
ters, especially of new laws. The people, assembled 
in the comitia curiata, adopted or rejected laws, 
elected higher officers, and declared war and peace. 
By the side of the Senate and the assembly of the 
curiae stood the rex, corresponding to the Greek 
basileus, not as an absolute king, but as a military 
leader, high priest, and chairman of certain 
courts. 

The Romans, therefore, at the time of the so- 
called kings lived in a military democracy based on 



The Primitive Form of Civil Society 271 

and developed from a constitution of gentes, phra- 
tries, and tribes.* 

As to the ancient Germans Engels sums up the 
result of his researches in two statements. The first 
reads : 

"It is an indisputable fact that the Germans were 
organized in gentes up to the time of the great mi- 
grations." 

The second is : 

"In general, the German tribes combined into 
nations had the same constitution that had devel- 
oped among the Greeks of the heroic era and the 
Romans at the time of the so-called kings: public 
meetings, council of gentile chiefs and military 
leaders, who coveted actual royal power."f 

The gentile constitution, Engels goes on to ex- 
plain, notwithstanding its perfection, had in its 
bosom the germ of dissolution. As causes of its 
final extinction he regards the substitution of pa- 
ternal for maternal law, the inheritance of prop- 
erty by the father's children, accumulation of 
wealth in the family, the introduction of slavery, 
the gradual formation of nobility. Its complete 
downfall, however, came with the advent of civili- 
zation. In Attica it was brought about by the revo- 
lution of Kleisthenes, 509 B.C. By the new consti- 
tution then adopted, the nation was divided in- 
stead of the territory; a large number of aliens, 

*Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 145-155- 
flbid. pp. 162, 175. 



272 



Ethics of the State 



partly slaves, partly immigrants, were admitted to 
citizenship; the organs of the gentile constitution 
were displaced in public affairs, and a formidable 
force of bowmen on foot and horseback formed to 
exercise coercion over the citizens.* 

In Rome gentilism was abolished by the consti- 
tution attributed to Servius Tullius. By it a new 
assembly was created, which included or excluded 
all members of the populus and the plebs accord- 
ing as they were enabled or not by their possessions 
to render military service. Thereby the old social 
order of blood kinship was destroyed, and a new 
one substituted which was founded on territorial 
division and wealth. The public power of coercion 
consisted of citizens liable to military duties, to be 
used against the slaves and the so-called proleta- 
rians who were excluded from military duty and 
general armament. 

"The whole history of the Roman republic moves 
inside of this constitution: the struggles between 
patricians and plebs for admission to office and 
participation in the allotment of state lands; the 
merging of the patrician nobility in the new class 
of large property and money owners; the gradual 
absorption by the latter of all the land of the small 
holders who had been ruined by military service; 
the cultivation of these enormous new tracts by 
slaves; the resulting depopulation of Italy, which 
not only opened the doors to the imperial tyrants, 

*Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 141, 142. 



The Primitive Form of Civil Society 273 

but also to their successors, the German barba- 
rians."* 

Among the Germans the gentile constitution dis- 
appeared in quite a different manner. The Roman 
state had under the empire become the worst op- 
pressor and exploiter of its subjects; hence the 
Teutonic barbarians who conquered the provinces 
came as real liberators. But, in return for libera- 
ting the Romans from their own State, they ap- 
propriated two-thirds of the entire land and di- 
vided it among themselves. The distribution was 
made by gentile rules. As the number of con- 
querors was relatively small, large tracts remained 
undivided in the possession of the nation, the tribe, 
or the gens. But the longer the gens lived in its 
village, and the better Germans and Romans be- 
came amalgamated in the course of time, the more 
was the character of kinship replaced by territorial 
bounds. 

The rapid loss of the bonds of blood in the gens, 
as a result of conquest, caused the degeneration of 
the tribal and national organs of gentilism. The 
rule over subjugated people does not agree with the 
gentile constitution. The German nations, mas- 
ters of the Roman provinces, had to organize their 
conquests. But they could neither adopt the Ro- 
mans as a body into their gentes, nor rule them 
by the help of gentile organs. A substitute for 
them had to be placed at the head of the Roman 
*Ibid. pp. 156, 157. 



274 



Ethics of the State 



administrative bodies that were largely retained in 
local affairs, and this substitute could only be an- 
other State. Hence the organs of the gentile con- 
stitution became State organs. The first represen- 
tative of the conquering nation was the military 
leader, whose power, for the sake of the external 
and internal security of the territory, needed to be 
strengthened. Thus the moment arrived for the 
transition from war leadership to monarchy. On 
account of the wide expanse of the empire, the 
council of chiefs could not hold any more meetings, 
and was, therefore, displaced by the standing ret- 
inue of the king. 

In the meantime the free land-owning peasants 
were exhausted and reduced to penury by continual 
civil feuds and wars of conquest. Their place in 
the army was taken by dependents of the new no- 
bility, whilst they themselves, impoverished and 
unshielded by the royal power, had to seek the pro- 
tection of the nobles or the Church. But to obtain 
it, they had to transfer the titles of their land to 
their patrons, from whom they received it back 
only in consideration of tithes and services. Once 
driven into this form of dependence, they gradually 
lost their individual liberty so much that most of 
them became serfs.* 

"Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 181-190. 



CHAPTER III 



THE ORIGIN AND NATURE OF THE STATE 

The gentile constitution of society, which van- 
ished in ancient Greece and Rome as well as among 
the Teutonic tribes with the advent of civilization, 
is said to have been succeeded by the State. Engels 
does not content himself with stating this as a his- 
torical fact, but inquires into the deeper causes 
which brought about the downfall of the old, and 
the rise of the new form of society. The inquiry is 
highly interesting; since it is calculated both to 
account for the origin of the State and to disclose 
its nature. He professes in advance to base his de- 
ductions not only on Morgan's "Ancient History," 
but also on Marx's "Capital." 

Consistently with the materialistic conception of 
history, the real cause of the transformation iof 
gentilism into the State is found in economic 
conditions. This is shown by the following reason- 
ing. In the lower stage of barbarism production 
was carried on for consumption only, not for ex- 
change. In the middle stage the possession of cat- 
tle already gave a regular surplus to the nomadic na- 
tions with sufficiently large herds. Thus a division of 
labor between nomadic and backward nations with- 
out herds came into existence, and, in consequence, 
also the conditions were furnished for a regular 

275 



276 



Ethics of the State 



exchange of goods. The upper stage of barbarism 
introduced a new division of labor between agricul- 
ture and handicrafts, resulting in the production of 
a continually increasing amount of commodities 
for the special purpose of exchange. Civilization 
not only intensified the established divisions of 
labor, by rendering the contrast between city 
and country more pronounced, but also added a 
third. 

"It created a class that did not take part in pro- 
duction, but occupied itself merely with the ex- 
change of products — the merchants. All former 
attempts at class formation were exclusively con- 
cerned with production. They divided the pro- 
ducers into directors and directed, or into pro- 
ducers on a more or less extended scale. But here 
a class appears for the first time that captures the 
control of production in general and subjugates 
the producers to its rule, without taking the least 
part in production. A class that makes itself the 
indispensable mediator between two producers and 
exploits them both under the pretext of saving 
them the trouble and risk of exchange, of extend- 
ing the markets for their products to distant re- 
gions, and of thus becoming the most useful class 
in society; a class of parasites, genuine social 
ichneumons, that skim the cream off production at 
home and abroad as a reward for very insignifi- 
cant services, that rapidly amass enormous wealth 
and gain social influence accordingly, that for this 



The Origin and Nature of the State 277 

reason reap ever new honors and ever greater 
control of production during the period of 
civilization, until they at last bring to light a 
production of their own — periodical crises in in- 
dustry."* 

At the same time metal coins came into use and, 
through them, a new device for controlling pro- 
ducers and their products. 

"Never again did the power of money show it- 
self in such primordial brutality and violence as 
in its youthful days. After the sale of commodi- 
ties for money came the borrowing of money, re- 
sulting in interest and usury. And no legislation of 
any later period stretches the debtor so mercilessly 
at the feet of the speculating creditor as the antique 
Grecian and Roman codes — both of them spon- 
taneous products of habit, without any other than 
economic pressure. "f 

The wealth in commodities and slaves was further 
increased by large holdings in land. The titles of in- 
dividuals to lots formerly assigned to them by the 
gens or the tribe had become so well established 
that they were now owned and inherited. But hav- 
ing become private property, they could, after the 
invention of money, be bought and sold as a com- 
modity. Nay more, they could also be mortgaged. 
In fact, hardly had private ownership been intro- 
duced, when the mortgage put in its appearance, 

*Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 200, 201. 
flbid. p. 202. 



278 



Ethics of the State 



and ever since clung to it as hetaerism and prostitu- 
tion did to the heels of monogamy. 

"Industrial expansion, money, usury, private 
land, mortgage thus progressed with the concen- 
tration and centralization of wealth in the hands 
of a small class, accompanied by the increasing 
impoverishment of the masses and the increasing 
mass of the paupers. The new aristocracy of wealth, 
so far as it did not coincide with old tribal nobility, 
forced the latter permanently into the background. 
And this division of free men into classes accord- 
ing to their wealth was accompanied, especially in 
Greece, by an enormous increase in the number of 
slaves, whose forced labor formed the basis on 
which the whole superstructure of society was 
reared."* 

Gentilism stood powerless in the face of the new 
elements that had grown without its assistance. It 
succumbed, to yield its place to the State. 

"The gentile constitution had grown out of a 
society that did not know any internal contradic- 
tions, and it was only adapted to such a society. It 
had no coercive power except public opinion. But 
now a society had developed that by force of all 
its economic conditions of existence divided human- 
ity into freemen and slaves, and exploiting rich 
and exploited poor. A society that not only could 
never reconcile these conditions, but drove them 
ever more to a climax. Such a society could only 

*Origin of the Family, p. 203. 



The Origin and Nature of the State 279 

exist by a continual open struggle of all classes 
against one another, or under the supremacy of a 
third power that under a pretense of standing 
above the struggling classes stifled their open con- 
flict and permitted a class struggle only on the 
economic field, in a so-called 'legal' form. Gentil- 
ism had ceased to live. It was crushed by the divi- 
sion of labor and by its result, the division of so- 
ciety into classes. It was replaced by the state."* 

Having stated this as a historical fact, Engels 
sketches the idea of the State. 

"The state, then, is by no means a power forced 
on society from outside; neither is it the 'realiza- 
tion of an ethical idea,' 'the image and the realiza- 
tion of reason,' as Hegel maintains. It is simply 
a product of society at a certain stage of evolution. 
It is a confession that this society has become hope- 
lessly divided against itself, has entangled itself in 
irreconcilable contradictions which it is powerless 
to banish. In order that these contradictions, these 
classes with conflicting economic interests, may not 
annihilate themselves and society in a useless strug- 
gle, a power becomes necessary that stands appar- 
ently above society and has the function of keep- 
ing down the conflicts and maintaining order. And 
this power, the outgrowth of society, but assuming 
supremacy over it and becoming more and more 
divorced from it, is the state. "f 

*Ibid. p. 205. 
flbid. p. 206. 



280 



Ethics of the State 



To develop this idea still further, he sets 
forth the difference between the State and gen- 
tilism. 

First, "the state differs from gentilism in that it 
first divides its members by territories." 

Secondly, the State creates a coercive power. 

"The state created a public power of coercion 
that did no longer coincide with self-organized 
and armed population. . . . This public power 
of coercion exists in every state. It is not composed 
of armed men alone, but also of such objects as 
prisons and correction houses attached to it, that 
were unknown to gentilism. It may be very small, 
almost infinitesimal with feebly developed class an- 
tagonism. . . . But it increases in the same ra- 
tio in which the class antagonisms become more 
pronounced, and in which neighboring states be- 
come larger and more populous. A conspicuous 
example is modern Europe, where the conquests 
and wars of conquest have nursed the public power 
to such a size that it threatens to swallow the whole 
society and the state itself." 

Thirdly, the State raises taxes and contracts pub- 
lic debts. 

"In order to maintain this public power, con- 
tributions of the citizens become necessary — the 
taxes. These were absolutely unknown in gentile so- 
ciety. But to-day we get our full measure of them. 
As civilization makes further progress, these taxes 
are no longer sufficient to cover public expenses. 



The Origin and Nature of the State 281 

The state makes drafts on the future, contracts 
loans and public debts." 

Fourthly, the State officials are exalted above 
society. 

"In possession of the public power and of the 
right of taxation, the officials in their capacity as 
state organs are now exalted above society. The 
free and voluntary respect that was accorded to the 
organs of gentilism does not satisfy them any more, 
even if they might have it. Representatives of a 
power that is divorced from society, they must en- 
force respect by exceptional laws that render them 
sacred and inviolable." 

Fifthly, both the antique and the modern State 
is the State of the most powerful economic class. 

"The state is the result of the desire to keep 
down class conflicts. But having arisen amid these 
conflicts, it is as a rule the state of the most power- 
ful economic class that, by force of its economic 
supremacy, becomes the ruling political class and 
thus acquires new means of subduing and exploiting 
the oppressed masses. The antique state was, there- 
fore, the state of the slave owners for the purpose 
of holding the slaves in check. The feudal state 
was the organ of the nobility for the oppression of 
serfs and dependent farmers. The modern repre- 
sentative state is the tool of the capitalist exploiters 
of wage labor." 

Sixthly, the dominating power in the State is 
wealth. 



282 



Ethics of the State 



"In most historical states the rights of the citi- 
zens are differentiated according to their wealth. 
This is a direct confirmation of the fact that the 
state is organized for the protection of the possess- 
ing against the non-possessing classes." 

"The political recognition of the differences in 
wealth is by no means necessary. On the contrary, 
it marks a low stage of state development. The 
highest form of the state, the democratic repub- 
lic, knows officially nothing of property distinctions. 
It is that form of the state which under modern 
conditions of society becomes more and more an 
unavoidable necessity. The last decisive struggle 
between proletariat and bourgeoisie can only be 
fought out under this state form. In such a state, 
wealth exerts its power indirectly, but all the more 
safely. This is done partly in the form of direct 
corruption of officials, after the classical type of the 
United States, or in the form of an alliance between 
government and bankers, which is established all 
the more easily when the public debt increases 
and when corporations concentrate in their hands 
not only the means of transportation, but also 
production itself, using the stock exchange as a 
center." 

"The possessing class rules directly through uni- 
versal suffrage. For as long as the oppressed class, 
and in this case the proletariat, is not ripe for eman- 
cipation, just so long will its majority regard the 
existing order of society as the only one possible, 



The Origin and Nature of the State 283 

and form the tail, the extreme wing, of the capital- 
ist class. But the more the proletariat matures 
toward self-emancipation, the more does it consti- 
tute itself as a separate class and elect its own 
representatives in place of the capitalists."* 

The foregoing quotations taken from one of 
Engels' classical works give a very clear and logic- 
ally consistent statement of the socialist concep- 
tion of the State. They account for its origin, mark 
out its end, show the nature of government, and 
define its dominating power — all in full accordance 
with the materialistic conception of history. Its 
origin is traced back to economic conditions arising 
after the introduction of private property classes; 
its government is described as the supremacy of the 
propertied using coercive power to keep down the 
propertiless ; its dominating power is characterized 
as the prevailing influence of wealth. 

It is remarkable how widely these ideas have 
been adopted by socialist writers and how faith- 
fully they have been reproduced by them with 
scarcely any modification. 

Bebel in his "Woman" merely condenses what 
Engels had explained at full length in his "Origin 
of the Family, Private Property and the State." 
After stating that gentilism, the primitive form of 
society, was broken down by the introduction of 
private property, he briefly sets forth his views on 
the origin and nature of the State as follows : 
*Origin of the Family, etc. pp. 206-211. 



284 



Ethics of the State 



"Along with private property and the personal 
right of inheritance, class distinctions and class 
contrasts came into existence. Rich property own- 
ers drew together against those who owned less or 
nothing. The former sought to get into their own 
hands the public offices of the new commonwealth, 
and to make them hereditary. Money, now become 
necessary, created hitherto unknown forms of in- 
debtedness. Wars against enemies from without, 
and conflicting interests within, as well as the vari- 
ous interests and relations which agriculture, handi- 
craft and commerce mutually produced rendered 
necessary complicated rules of right, they de- 
manded special organs to guard the orderly move- 
ment of the social machinery, and to settle dis- 
putes. The same held good for the master and 
slave, creditor and debtor. A power, accordingly, 
became necessary to supervise, lead, regulate and 
harmonize all these relations, with authority to pro- 
tect, and, when needed, to punish. Thus rose the 
State, the product, accordingly, of the conflicting 
interests that sprang up in the new social order. 
Its administration naturally fell into the hands of 
those who had the liveliest interest in its estab- 
lishment, and who, in virtue of their social 
power, possessed the greatest influence — the rich. 
Aristocracy of property and democracy con- 
fronted each other, accordingly, even there where 
externally complete equality of political rights 
existed." 



The Origin and Nature of the State 285 

"The institution of the State is, accordingly, the 
necessary result of a social order, that, standing 
upon the higher plane of the subdivision of labor, 
is broken up into a large number of occupations, 
animated by different, frequently conflicting, inter- 
ests, and hence has the oppression of the weaker 
for a consequence."* 

Bebel professed the same views in his famous 
speech delivered in the Congress of the German 
Social Democracy, at Jena, 1905. 

Likewise, according to Loria, the gentile consti- 
tution was the original form of society, and the 
State, as it now exists, the form of society conse- 
quent to the introduction of private property. His 
theory is contained in the following propositions. 

Association of labor constitutes the original 
foundation of civil society. At the outset it did not 
mean private property, for at first co-operation 
usually accompanies the collective property regime. 
But private property, when introduced later on, 
exercised a twofold influence on the political con- 
stitution. First, by allowing the members of the 
same gens, heretofore united by communal prop- 
erty, isolated and remote lands in severalty, it de- 
stroyed the ancient gentile nucleus, and substituted 
the State based on territory for the State founded 
on the gens. 

Secondly, "private property with its natural out- 
come, the capitalistic system, concentrated political 

*Woman. pp. 42, 43. 



286 



Ethics of the State 



power in the hands of the proprietary class and con- 
sequently introduced radical changes in the nature 
of sovereignty. Under the regime of collective 
property, the State differed very slightly from so- 
ciety, of which it was simply the organizing force ; 
but with the institution of private property and the 
concentration of political power in the hands of the 
proprietary class, the State suddenly severed its 
former connection with society as a whole, and 
came to represent the interests of a mere fraction 
of the community. Thereupon two distinctly sep- 
arate series of relations were established, one be- 
tween the State and the proprietors, and the other 
between the State and the non-proprietors. As 
against the proprietors, the State found itself, on 
the one hand, in a passive relation, inasmuch as it 
was the creature of their own making, and, on the 
other hand, in an active relation, in so far as it 
placed certain restrictions upon their liberty in 
their own interest." 

To the non-proprietors the State stood in an en- 
tirely active relation. Having sprung from influ- 
ences that were foreign to their interests, it sub- 
jected their liberty to such restrictions as it pleased 
the proprietors to impose. Thus although the insti- 
tution of private property effected an enfeeblement 
of the State in its relations to the proprietors, it 
brought about at the same time an extension of 
State authority over those who were excluded from 
ownership. This dominion was still further in- 



The Origin and Nature of the State 287 

creased by the necessity of holding the propertiless 
classes in subjection and preventing violent reac- 
tions, which, however powerless they might be to 
destroy the economic system, would disturb the 
tranquillity of the opulent classes. 

With this increase in force, the entire organiza- 
tion of the State underwent a substantial change. 
During the epoch of collective property either a 
patriarchal form of government prevailed, wherein 
authority was accorded to the oldest or wisest, or 
a military tyranny was established, which was elec- 
tive and founded upon popular approval. But, with 
the growth of private property, these forms of gov- 
ernment were rejected, because they were incap- 
able of disciplining the class excluded from the 
possession of the soil. The State that then ap- 
peared, being capitalistic in character, was no 
longer permeated with the principles of equality 
and no longer echoed the peaceful and equitable 
expressions of universal consent, but became in the 
hands of a rapacious minority a terrible engine of 
offensive and aggressive war against the exploited 
majority.* 

The following is Labriola's conception of the 
State. 

*The Economic Foundations of Society, pp. 124-128. Loria 
does not agree with those writers who refuse the appellation 
of State to the primitive forms of political government, and 
affirm that the State only emerges with the institution of pri- 
vate property, which makes a coercive power necessary to hold 



288 



Ethics of the State 



"It was necessary to arrive at a comprehension of 
the fact that the state exists and maintains itself 
in that it is organized for the defense of certain 
definite interests, of one part against all the rest of 
society itself, which must be made in such a way, 
in its entirety, that the resistance of the subjects, 
of the ill-treated and exploited, either is lost in mul- 
tiple frictions, or is tempered by the partial advan- 
tages, wretched though they be, to the oppressed 
themselves." 

"The concept of the state has ceased to repre- 
sent the direct cause of the historic movement as 
the presumed author of society, because it has been 
seen that in each of its forms and its variations there 
is nothing else than the positive and forced organi- 
zation of a definite class rule, or of a definite com- 
pact between different classes."* 

Gabriel Deville, one of the leaders of the revo- 
lutionary socialists in France, in expounding his 
theory of the State, differs in no point from Engels 
and Marx. Laying down the definition of the State 
he says : 

"The State, I will maintain in my turn, is the 
public power of coercion, created and maintained in 
human societies by their division into classes, and 

the lower order of non-owners in subjection. He is of the 
opinion that the primitive clan and gens show us, though in 
an embryonic form, a political organization and, therefore, the 
institution of the State. See footnote, p. 127. 

*Essays on the Materialistic Conception of History, pp. 183, 
184. 



The Origin and Nature of the State 289 

which, having force at its disposal, makes laws and 
levies taxes."* 

Interpreting his definition he subjoins: 

"From the definition that I have given, it follows 
in the first place that the State has not always ex- 
isted, but there have been societies without a State; 
but the absence of a State did not prevent these 
societies from having an organization. My thesis 
is that a social organization is possible without a 
State and that the State appears and subsists only in 
societies divided into classes. Some societies without 
States have continued to exist down to our own 
times among the Indians of North America. And it 
was by studying the social regime of these Indians, 
and of the Iroquois especially, that Morgan was 
able, by his remarkable work, Ancient Society, to 
enable us at last to clearly understand the primitive 
societies of Greece and Italy, societies which were 
based, like the Indian societies, upon the gens! 1 

"Thus the State whose non-existence in a society 
may be demonstrated so long as there are no 
classes in that society, makes its appearance in a 
more or less developed form with the existence of 
classes and the antagonism they involve."f 

As the object of the State Deville marks out the 
ensuring of the submission of the dispossessed 
classes. 

*The State and Socialism. Translated "by Robert Rives 
La Monte. New York 1900. p. 4. 
flbid. pp. 6, 13. 



290 



Ethics of the State 



"As soon as there are in a society a possessing" 
class and a dispossessed class, there exists in that 
society a constant source of collisions which the so- 
cial organization would not long resist, if there was 
not a power charged with maintaining, to use the 
consecrated phrase, the 'established order,' charged 
in other words, with the protection of the economic 
situation of the possessing party. Now, from its 
very birth, this has been the role of the State. 

"An organ of conservation, the offspring of 
struggles or threats of struggles between conflicting 
interests, conflicting because of the antagonism be- 
tween economic conditions, born . . . with the 
division of society into classes, the State has evolved 
with the development of that division, i.e., in short, 
with the economic relations which form the basis 
of that division; but, under the various appearances 
it has worn, its object has remained the same, be- 
cause ever since the appearance of classes it has al- 
ways had a privileged economic situation to de- 
fend and conflicts to repress. When it is known 
that the State is a class-instrument it is easy to un- 
derstand whence comes its character of relative 
permanence which bourgeois writers point out with- 
out explaining."* 

The State, based on private property and having 
for its object the subjection of the dispossessed 
classes, has in Deville's opinion, proved, under a 

*The State and Socialism. Translated by Robert Rives 
La Monte. New York 1900. p. 21. 



The Origin and Nature of the State 291 



moral aspect, a degeneration, and by its economic 
results an evil for the masses. The disappearance 
of societies based on the gens, he says, was a prog- 
ress, but not in a moral sense. It was not accom- 
plished through aspiration toward the realization 
of righteousness. The extension of private property 
and the disappearance of the gens gave rise to the 
most despicable sentiments. Greed, hypocrisy, and 
false speaking, induced by personal interests, pre- 
sided over the ruin of the old organization and the 
appearance of the classes. The result of progress 
has been the increase of the knowledge and power 
of man, the multiplication of the forces at his ser- 
vice, and the extension of the opportunities for 
more comfortable living and fuller development. 
But the realization of these advantages was a possi- 
bility only for the minority; for the majority it was 
but too often a source of new sufferings, from the 
time when classes and with them the rudiments of 
the State began to exist down to the present hour.* 

To turn now to American socialists, concerning 
the State, Morris Hillquit holds the following 
propositions : 

"The State appears in the social development of 
mankind simultaneously with the institutions of 
private property and slavery and as their necessary 
concomitant." 

"The socialist definition of the State as an or- 

*Ibid. pp. 14, 18. See on this topic also Bax. Ethics of 
Socialism, pp. 106-120. 



292 



Ethics of the State 



ganization of the ruling classes for the maintenance 
of the exploited classes in a condition of depend- 
ence, is entirely correct in substance." 

"The modern State is the State of the capitalistic 
extracting profits from the working members of the 
community, and the modern government is, in the 
words of Karl Marx, 'but a committee for manag- 
ing the common affairs of the capitalist class.' "*' 

G. D. Herron characterizes civilized society, the 
State included, as an institution organized for the 
oppression of the poor by the rich, of the laboring 
by the possessing class. 

"The class question, he says, is not as to whether 
we like to have classes or not; the question is: Are 
there classes in society as it is now constituted, and 
is the present constitution of society founded upon 
the division of the people into classes? And do 
class antagonisms and social destruction inhere in 
the nature of a class society? No one disputes the 
affirmative answer to this question." 

"And if I am to do anything whatever, even as 
a social coral builder, toward making the world 
equally good and resourceful and lovely for all 
men, I must begin with the fact that all that we 
know of as civilization, up to the present time, has 
been the institutionalized expression and defence of 
one class of people living off another class. There 
are no words that can make this fact hideous and 
ghastly enough, or vivid and revolutionary enough 

^Socialism in Theory and Practice, pp. 96, 97, 131. 



The Origin and Nature of the State 293 

— the fact that society and its institutions are or- 
ganized for the purpose of enabling some people to 
live off of other people, the few to live off the 
many. There is no language realistic enough, or 
possessed of sufficient integrity, to lay bare the 
chasm between the class that works and the class 
that reaps the fruit of that work; between the class 
that is grist for the great world-mill of economic 
might and the class that harvests that grist. And 
until the working class becomes conscious of itself 
as the only class that has a right to be, until the 
worker understands that he is exploited and bound 
by the power which his own unpaid labor places in 
the hands that exploit and bind him, until we all 
clearly see that what we call civilization is but the 
organized and legalized robbery of the common 
labor, until we have a revolutionized comprehen- 
sion of the fact that our churches and governments, 
our arts and literatures, our educations and philoso- 
phies, our morals and manners, are all more or less 
the expressions and deformities of this universal 
robbery drawing their life and motives out of the 
vitals of the man who is down and unprivileged, 
out of his unpaid labor and exhausted life — until 
then, I say, our dreams and schemes of a common 
good or better society are but philistine Utopias, our 
social and industrial reforms but self-deceit, and 
our weapons but the shadows of stupidity or 
hypocrisy. A civilization that is fundamentally 
parasitical, that has its birth and breath and being 



294 Ethics of the State 



in the power of one class to take what another class 
produces, cannot be so reformed or added to as to 
bring forth economic justice or any kind of eman- 
cipation; or so ordered as to procure equality of 
opportunity and free individuality." 

"I am defining or characterizing the civilization 
we now have as an impersonal yet universal beast 
of prey, expressing the power of the ruling and 
possessing class to absorb the whole output of life 
and labor of humanity. There have never existed 
other than predatory civilizations. And our insti- 
tutions, morals and creeds have but served to keep 
the people submissive to the depredations of the 
ruling class. To this end have the powers that 
might happen to be at any given time always been 
invested with the hypocrisy and threat of a divine 
origin."* 

Later on Herron styles the American Constitu- 
tion "a monumental and comprehensive deceit, de- 
liberately devised for the purpose of preventing the 
people from governing themselves, and of keeping 
the affairs and issues of government in the hands of 
the possessing class."f 

In the platform of the Socialist Party, adopted 
in Chicago, 1904, and penned by G. D. Herron, 
the political institutions of the United States are 
characterized in the same strain. We read in the 
introductory part : 

*From Revolution to Revolution. New York 1903. pp. 8, 9. 
flbid. p. 17. 



The Origin and Nature of the State 295 

"Our American institutions came into the world 
in the name of freedom. They have been seized 
upon by the capitalist class as the means of rooting 
out the idea of freedom from among the people. 
Our state and national legislatures have become the 
mere agencies of propertied interests. These inter- 
ests control the appointments and decision of the 
judges of our courts. They have come into what 
is practically a private ownership of all functions 
and forces of government. They are using these to 
betray and conquer foreign and weaker peoples, in 
order to establish new markets for the surplus 
goods which the people make, but are too poor to 
buy. They are generally so invading and restrict- 
ing the right of suffrage as to take away unawares 
the right of the worker to a vote or voice in pub- 
lic affairs. By enacting new and interpreting old 
laws, they are preparing to attack the liberty of the 
individual even to speak or think for himself, or 
for the common good." 

The preceding quotations, taken from authors of 
various nationalities, so complete one another as 
to develop but one idea of the State. The gist of 
all of them is that civil society, originating ulti- 
mately in the introduction of private property, 
proximately in class antagonism, exercised govern- 
ment for no other purpose than that of subjecting 
and exploiting the dispossessed class, and by no 
other authority than the power of coercion result- 
ing from economic superiority. 



CHAPTER IV 



THE ABOLITION OF THE STATE 

The State, if it is in reality what the socialists 
maintain it to be, is by its very nature doomed to 
extinction. It must break down, once private prop- 
erty is abolished and communism introduced, for 
then it will be without a basis on which to rest; it 
will cease to exist for lack of an object, once class 
antagonism is overcome, for then a power to keep 
the dispossessed in subjection is no longer neces- 
sary; it will be destroyed, if the oppressed rise 
against the oppressors and establish equality of 
rights and opportunities, because then the rule of 
the few over the many will be at an end. But all 
these conditions, socialists foretell, will be fulfilled, 
and very probably in a not very distant future. So- 
cialism if once triumphant will do away with prop- 
erty, and consequently also with class distinctions 
and class struggle, with inequalities and influence 
of wealth. 

Socialism, therefore, we are assured, will give 
the deathblow to the State. In this sense Engels 
writes in his "Origin of the Family, etc." 

"We are now rapidly approaching a stage of 
evolution in production in which the distinction of 
classes has not only ceased to be a necessity, but 
becomes a positive fetter to production. Hence 

296 



The Abolition of the State 297 

these classes must fall as inevitably as they once 
arose. The state must irrevocably fall with them. 
The society that is to re-organize production on 
the basis of a free and equal association of the pro- 
ducers, will transfer the machinery of the state 
where it will then belong, into the Museum of An- 
tiquities by the side of the spinning wheel and the 
bronze axe."* 

Still more clearly he predicts the end of the State 
in his "Socialism, Utopian and Scientific." 

"The proletariat seizes political power and turns 
the means of production into State property." 

"But, in doing this, it abolishes itself as prole- 
tariat, abolishes all class distinctions and class an- 
tagonisms, abolishes also the State as State. So- 
ciety thus far, based upon class antagonisms, had 
need of the State. That is, of an organization of 
the particular class which was pro tempore the ex- 
ploiting class, an organization for the purpose of 
preventing any interference from without with the 
existing conditions of production, and therefore, 
especially, for the purpose of forcibly keeping the 
exploited class in the condition of oppression cor- 
responding with the given mode of production 
(slavery, serfdom, wage-labour). ... As soon 
as there is no longer any social class to be held in 
subjection; as soon as class rule, and the individual 
struggle for existence based upon our present an- 
archy in production, with the collisions and ex- 

*Origin of the Family, p. 211. 



Ethics of the State 



cesses arising from these, are removed, nothing 
remains to be repressed, and a special repressive 
force, a State, is no longer necessary. The first act 
by virtue of which the State really constitutes itself 
the representative of the whole society — the taking 
possession of the means of production in the name 
of society — this is, at the same time, its last inde- 
pendent act as a State. State interference in so- 
cial relations becomes, in one domain after another, 
superfluous, and then dies out of itself; the govern- 
ment of persons is replaced by the administration 
of things and by the conduct of processes of pro- 
duction. The State is not 'abolished.' It dies 
out."* 

The communist manifesto, Part II, reads: 
"When in the course of development, class dis- 
tinctions have disappeared and all production has 
been concentrated in the hands of a vast association 
of the whole nation, the public power will lose its 
political character. Political power, properly so 
called, is merely the organized power of one class 
for oppressing the other. If the proletariat during 
its contest with the bourgeoisie is compelled, by the 
force of circumstances, to organize itself as a class, 
if, by means of a revolution, it makes itself the 
ruling class, and as such sweeps away by force the 
old conditions of production, then it will, along 
with these conditions, have swept away the condi- 
tions for the existence of class antagonisms, and of 

*Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, pp. 75-77. 



The Abolition of the State 299 



classes generally, and will thereby have abolished 
its own supremacy as a class." 

Bebel arrives at the same conclusion. 

"The State is the inevitably necessary organiza- 
tion of a civil order that rests upon class rule. The 
moment class organizations fall through the aboli- 
tion of private property, the State loses both the 
necessity and the possibility for its existence. With 
the removal of the conditions of rulership, the 
State gradually ceases to be, the same as creeds 
wane when the belief ceases in supernatural beings 
or in transcendental powers gifted with reason. 
Words must have sense; if they lose that, they cease 
to convey ideas."* 

G. Deville, who had so faithfully adopted En- 
gels' political views, maintains like him, that the 
State being a class-instrument, has lasted as long as 
there have been and will last so long as there shall 
be classes.f 

Likewise R. Rives La Monte, after setting forth 
Engels' views on the subject, concludes: 

"It is thus seen that, according to the teaching 
of historical materialism, the State is destined, 
when it becomes the State of the working-class, to 
remove its own foundation — economic inequality 
— and thus to commit suicide. "J 

P. J. Troelstra in a memorial presented to the 

*Woman. p. 272. See also p. 318. 
fThe State and Socialism, pp. 13, 23. 
X Socialism, Positive and Negative, p. 113. 



3<x> 



Ethics of the State 



International Socialist Bureau and the Interparlia- 
mentary Commission on August 5, 1907, affirms: 

"Their (the Social Democrats') theory teaches 
us that the victory of the proletariat attacks the 
very foundation of the state, which afterwards 
may be stored away in a museum of antiquities."* 
The State, then, as Bebel intimated, has the 
same destiny as religion, monogamy, and the 
family; like them, owing its existence to economic 
conditions, it will disappear in the final evolution 
of mankind under triumphant socialism. 
*Int. Soc. Rev. Nov. 1907. p. 273. 



CHAPTER V 



SOCIALIST ATTITUDE TOWARD THE STATE 

The nature and the object of the State having 
been set forth at full length, it remains for us 
to discuss the attitude of its citizens toward it. 
Heretofore it has generally been maintained that 
a body politic has authority over its constit- 
uent members, and that these conversely are 
under the obligation of submission and allegiance. 
But consistently with socialist ideas such relations 
between governments and governed must cease to 
exist. The subjects of the present State, far from 
being liable to submission, have the right of assum- 
ing an attitude of opposition to the ruling power. 
This will be plain, if we recall to mind what the 
State is according to the views of contemporary 
socialists. 

According to Engels it is "an organization for 
the purpose of preventing any interference from 
without with the existing conditions of production 
and especially for the purpose of forcibly keeping 
the exploited class in the condition of oppression 
corresponding with the given mode of production 
(slavery, serfdom, wage-labor)." 

According to Deville : 

"A good for the minority only; an evil, a source 
of sufferings for all others." 

301 



302 



Ethics of the State 



According to Loria : 

"In the hands of a rapacious minority a terrible 
engine of defensive and offensive warfare against 
the exploited majority." 

According to Labriola it "exists and maintains 
itself in that it is organized for the defense of cer- 
tain definite interests of one part of society against 
the rest of society itself." 

According to Herron : 

"Society and its institutions are organized for 
the purpose of enabling some people to live off 
other people, the few off the many." 

And civilization in general, as we have it now, 
is "an impersonal yet universal beast of prey, ex- 
pressing the power of the ruling and possessing 
class to absorb and to convert into ever-increasing 
power to absorb, the whole output of the life and 
labor of humanity." 

This view on the nature of the State is con- 
sistently held also with regard to the laws enacted 
by it. To quote from Loria : 

"As a coactive and imperative instruction, the 
law is a necessary product of the capitalistic econ- 
omy, serving to protect the income holders from 
their own importunities and from attacks on the 
side of the labourers. It becomes thus at once the 
complement and the integration of capitalist moral- 
ity, where the latter proves insufficient."* 

The "Western Clarion" writes: 

^Economic Foundations of Society, p. 77. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 303 

"The garb beneath which present capitalist civili- 
zation masks its hideousness is termed 'law.' 'Law 
and order' is the slogan of every capitalist pirate who 
ventures forth in search of plunder. If his victims 
dare to raise their hands to stay his ravages, the 
law is invoked in behalf of their plunderer and the 
victims are awed into submission to his thieving 
practices. There is not a crime in the calendar that 
cannot be safely committed under the guise of the 
law, if the perpetrator thereof knows how to go 
about it. Millions of people are murdered by slow 
starvation and heart-breaking toil under its benign 
dispensations. Countless thousands experience life 
from the cradle to the grave merely as a torture 
and agony, while at all times the law interposes be- 
tween themselves and the alleviation of their mis- 
ery. And what is the law ? It is merely the dictum 
of the dominant economic class in human society, 
calculated to safeguard their dominion over others 
and perpetuate their power and privilege to rule 
and rob." 

''The law is purely the creation of rulers. It is 
but a clumsy pretext whereby they seek to justify 
their right to rule and rob. Itself but a flimsy pre- 
tense, a make believe, the art of administering it so 
as to make it effective for its purpose becomes the 
art of flimflam par excellence."* 

Bax condemns the modern law for the same rea- 
son and in quite unmistakable terms. 
*Quoted by the Worker. Aug. 10, 1907. 



304 



Ethics of the State 



"A very little reflection will suffice to show that 
the civil law referred to is an entirely class-institu- 
tion, designed ( i ) in the interest of that class with- 
in a class so powerful throughout all periods of 
civilization, viz., the legal class, and (2) of the 
privileged and possessing classes generally."* 

He has still more contempt for the criminal law, 
criminal courts, and judges. 

"Paradox as it may seem, it is an undoubted 
truth that no judge can be strictly an honest man. 
The judge must necessarily be a man of inferior 
moral calibre." 

"The festering mass of hypocrisy of which 
benchdom consists is only too evident at every turn. 
There is, of course, the hypocrisy which is racy of 
the judicial soil, just as there is the hypocrisy of 
the clerical soil. To this belongs the professed deep 
reverence for the 'law of England/ when no one 
knows better than the benchman who has studied 
it, that well nigh one half of English law is based 
on effete superstition, of which it presents in many 
cases the most grotesque instances, . . . and 
that the other half is founded on the baldest class 
interest and prejudice. So that all things consid- 
ered there is hardly a branch of learning the pur- 
suit of which is more calculated to inspire the aver- 
age student with a contempt for its subject-matter 
than English law — hardly even excepting Divinity." 

"That a society which is based on property and 
*Religion of Socialism, p. 147. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 305 



privilege must have a criminal code as its necessary- 
consequence we are well aware, but we none the 
less protest against its 'administrator,' the judge, 
being regarded in any more honorable light than 
its other 'administrator/ the hangman."* 

If, as socialists maintain, the State is but the rule 
of the possessing classes in their own interest, if its 
authority is a coercive power over the dispossessed 
for the purpose of keeping them in subjection, if its 
laws are nothing but measures enacted to oppress 
and exploit the mass of the working people; then, 
indeed, there can not exist any obligation of alle- 
giance and obedience to political sovereignty. The 
State, in such a supposition, has no right whatever 
to exercise any authority, and the laws it enacts are 
null and void under such conditions. Christian 
philosophy will always hold this view. For in ac- 
cordance with its principles, civil authority is not 
main force exercised by the stronger against the 
weaker, but is essentially a moral power, conferred 
on governments, directly or indirectly, from on 
high for the benefit of the whole society, and not 
merely for the personal interests of a few. Socialist 
philosophers, of course, are still louder in denounc- 
ing the unlawfulness of governmental powers, 
which, as they assert, the possessing class has in the 
present State usurped over the dispossessed work- 
ing people; but they advance reasons of quite a 
different kind. 
*Ibid. pp. 108, 109, no. 



306 



Ethics of the State 



The capitalists, in Bax's opinion, have no right 
to rule, because they are only a sham majority. 

"The bourgeoisie right of the majority is the 
vampire of a dead reality." 

"With the entrance upon the arena of the mod- 
ern proletariat, of capitalism and the differentiation 
of class-interests therein involved, the old popular 
sovereignty has become a meaningless phrase. The 
old majority is in the thraldom of this minority 
(the franchise notwithstanding)." 

"The majority under a capitalist system will 
necessarily for the most part vote for the mainte- 
nance of that system under one guise or another, 
not because they love it, but of sheer ignorance and 
stupidity. It is by the active minority from out of 
the stagnant inert mass that the revolution will be 
accomplished. It is to this Socialist minority that 
individuals, acting during the revolutionary period, 
are alone accountable. The socialist leader or dele- 
gate, as such, does not take account of the absolute 
majority of the population, which consists of two 
sections, i.e., of those who are interested in the 
maintenance of the present system and those who 
are blind or inert enough to be misled by them. To 
disregard the opinion of these latter is no more 
tyranny than it is tyranny to hold a drunken man 
back by force when he seeks to get out of the door 
of a railway carriage with the train going at full 
speed. The man does not want to be maimed or 
killed; he is simply misled by his drunken fancy as 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 307 



to what is conducive to his welfare. In the same 
way the workman who sides with one or the other 
of the various political parties against Socialism, 
does not want to be the slave of capital, never cer- 
tain of his next week's lodging and food. In co- 
ercing him if necessary, that is, in negativing his 
apparent aims, you are affirming his real aims." 

"Of course, as soon as Socialism becomes an ac- 
complished fact, the inert mass of indifferentism 
which long clings to the status quo, not from real class 
interest, but merely through ignorance and laziness, 
will be dissolved, and its elements pass over to the 
new status quo of Socialism. The Socialist party will 
then cease to exist as a party, and become transform- 
ed into the absolute majority of the population."* 

Others, as for instance, Herron, Spargo, Bur- 
rowes, denounce modern governments as unlawful 
for the reason that capitalistic rule is but organized 
and legalized robbery of common labor; that 
the working class alone constitutes society, the real 
public, the social organism, and has alone the 
power and right to be; that the interests of the 
capitalist class, which conflict with those of the 
working class, must be eliminated, capitalism being 
a cancerous growth in the body politic ; that social- 
ism holds within it the religion, science, philosophy 
and morals which shall establish man upon earth. f 

*Religion of Socialism, pp. 119, 120. 

fSee above, chap. III. The Worker. Feb. 3, 1906. Thoughts 
for the Majority. By P. E. Burrowes. 



3 o8 



Ethics of the State 



In accordance with such views, the actually ex- 
isting governments are unlawful, because the pro- 
letariat alone represents society and is alone en- 
titled to sovereign power and authority. It is 
scarcely necessary to remark that the laws, too, now 
in existence are regarded by socialist philosophers 
as void of any binding force. For to their mind 
they are but measures enacted by unlawful State 
authority for the sole purpose of protecting the 
interests of the capitalist class and insuring 
the oppression and exploitation of the working 
people. 

But modern socialism, since it is not only a phil- 
osophical theory, but also a revolutionary move- 
ment, goes still farther in its opposition to civil so- 
ciety. Whilst as a theory it merely denies the law- 
fulness of governments, as a revolutionary move- 
ment it calls for open war against the State and its 
institutions. 

Revolutionary socialism is essentially a struggle 
of the dispossessed working class against the pos- 
sessing class, of the proletariat organized into a 
class-conscious body against the capitalists. The 
Chicago platform of 1904 asserts this struggle in 
the strongest terms when it says: 

"Between these two (the working and the pos- 
sessing) classes there can be no possible compro- 
mise or identity of interests, any more than there 
can be peace in the midst of war, or light in the 
midst of darkness. A society based upon this class 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 309 



division carries in itself the seeds of its own destruc- 
tion. Such a society is founded in fundamental in- 
justice. There can be no possible basis for social 
peace, for individual freedom, for mental and 
moral harmony, except in the conscious and com- 
plete triumph of the working class as the only class 
that has the right or power to be." 

The end aimed at by this class-struggle is the 
general emancipation of the proletariat, or in the 
words of the Chicago platform just quoted, the 
complete triumph of the working class. But the 
possessing is also the ruling class. For the owners 
of private property in the means of production 
form the State, have invented and exercise gov- 
ernmental powers, in order to keep the dispos- 
sessed in subjection, have possessed themselves of 
all political institutions and use them as instru- 
ments to exploit the working class and rob it of 
the fruit of its labor. The class struggle, therefore, 
to become successful, must be a struggle also against 
governments, must end in their overthrow and in 
the conquest of governmental or political power 
by the proletariat. 

This is the view universally taken by revolution- 
ary socialists. 

"The proletariat," says Engels, "seizes the pub- 
lic power, and by means of this transforms the so- 
cialized means of production, slipping from the 
hands of the bourgeoisie into public property. 
.. . . To accomplish this act of universal emanci- 



3io 



Ethics of the State 



pation is the theoretical mission of the modern pro- 
letariat."* 

In the communist manifesto, Part II, we read: 
"The immediate aim of the Communists is the 
same as that of all other proletarian parties : forma- 
tion of the proletariat into a class, overthrow of 
the bourgeois supremacy, conquest of the political 
power by the proletariat." 

The Erfurt program adopted the idea of Marx 
and Engels. 

u The struggle of labor against capitalistic op- 
pression is necessarily a political one. The labor- 
ing class cannot carry on its industrial struggles 
and develop its economic organization without 
political rights. It cannot effect the transfer of the 
means of production into the possession of the 
body social without possessing itself of political 
power." 

The platforms of the American socialists are in 
this respect as in many others repetitions of the 
Erfurt platform. The Chicago platform of 1904 
contains the following clause : 

"Such measures of relief as we may be able to 
force from capitalism are but a preparation of 
the workers to seize the whole powers of gov- 
ernment, and thus come into their rightful inherit- 
ance." 

Of what kind this struggle against the State and 
government will be, we may form an idea if we 
^Socialism, Utopian and Scientific, p. 86. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 311 

call to mind that socialists look upon the civil 
powers that exist as unlawful usurpations and the 
laws enacted by them as unjust measures of op- 
pression, and further remember that according 
to their ethical theory, during the time of com- 
bat with capitalism, whatever leads to the prole- 
tarian victory must be regarded as morally good, 
and whatever tends to hinder or retard it as 
morally bad. 

For this conception of socialist morality we have 
quoted passages from Spargo, Chas. H. Kerr, Bur- 
rowes, Robert Rives La Monte. To repeat some 
words of the latter : 

"As fast as they (proletariat) will become class- 
conscious, they will recognize and praise as moral 
all conduct that tends to hasten the social revolu- 
tion and they will condemn as unhesitatingly as 
immoral all conduct that tends to prolong the 
dominance of the capitalist class."* 

The meaning of such a moral principle is very 
plain. It evidently amounts to this, that socialists 
need not scruple about the lawfulness of the means 
they are to employ in their attempt to overthrow 
the present social order and to conquer political 
power; for all means whatever, whether open, or 
secret, are allowed to them, provided they lead to 
the victory of the proletariat. The only question 
for them is, whether the method to be employed 
is opportune or not, effective or not under given 
*See above, part i, chap. iv. 



3 12 



Ethics of the State 



circumstances, qualified or not to carry their revo- 
lutionary enterprises to a successful end. 

Stating this doctrine concerning the attitude 
toward the State as truly socialistic, we are not 
guilty of exaggeration or misinterpretation. It has 
not only been proposed by prominent intellectual 
leaders, as is evident from the above quotations, 
but is also practically applied in discussions which 
in these very days are carried on concerning pa- 
triotism, civil allegiance, and anti-militarism. 

It is openly maintained that socialism abolishes 
national differences and national frontiers, and in- 
stead of them effects a union of the several national 
sections of the proletariat on the basis of a firm 
and equal friendship, so as to present a solid front 
to the common enemy, capitalistic society. 

In the communist manifesto, Part II, Marx 
meets the objection that communists wish to abolish 
countries and nationalities with the following an- 
swer: 

"The working men have no country. We can- 
not take from them what they have not got. Since 
the proletariat must first of all acquire political su- 
premacy, must rise to be the leading class of the 
nation, must constitute itself the nation, it is, so 
far, itself national, though not in the bourgeois 
sense of the word. 

"National differences and antagonisms between 
peoples are daily more and more vanishing owing 
to the bourgeoisie development. . . . The su- 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 313 



premacy of the proletariat will cause them to van- 
ish still faster." 

Bax develops this idea more fully and with 
greater clearness. He says : 

"For the Socialist, the frontier does not exist; 
for him love of country as such is no nobler senti- 
ment than love of class." 

"No, the foreign policy of the great Interna- 
tional Socialist party must be to break up these 
hideous race monopolies called empires, beginning 
in each case at home. Hence everything which 
makes for the disruption and disintegration of the 
empire to which he belongs must be welcomed by 
the Socialist as an ally. It is his duty to urge on any 
movement tending in any way to dislocate the com- 
mercial relations of the world, knowing that every 
shock the modern complex commercial system suf- 
fers weakens it and brings its destruction nearer. 
This is the negative side of the foreign policy of 
Socialism. The positive is comprised in a single 
sentence: to consolidate the union of the several 
national sections on the basis of firm and equal 
friendship, steadfast adherence to definite prin- 
ciple, and determination to present a solid front to 
the enemy."* 

As an illustration of the socialist loyalty to their 
country we quote a passage from a manifesto of 
the International Socialist Bureau, 1907. 

"In 1870, while the cannons were thundering on 
*Religion of Socialism, pp. 126, 127. 



3H 



Ethics of the State 



the frontiers, the German workers wrote to the 
French workers: 'We must never forget that the 
workers of all countries are friends, and that the 
despots of all countries are our enemies.' And the 
French workers replied : French workers ! German 
workers ! Spanish workers ! Let us unite in a cry 
of denunciation of war."* 

We would undoubtedly go too far were we to 
maintain that all socialists take the same extreme 
ground as Bax. Some of them, as for instance the 
German Social Democrats, are at present so far 
from extreme radical views on this point as even 
to profess a moderate patriotism. But be this as it 
may, American socialists, at least at present, detest 
patriotism and national frontiers and advocate in- 
stead of them international union. 

To May Wood Simon patriotism is the out- 
growth of a past age, still fostered for the benefit 
of the ruling class, though the conditions from 
which it rose exist no longer. 

"Although the conditions that made patriotism 
an essential to social progress have long gone, it 
lingers on, is taught in our schools and praised in 
our pulpits, for the benefit, as ever, of a ruling 
class, to whom alone it is advantageous. "f 

A passage in the Chicago platform is to the same 
effect. 

"The chief significance of national boundaries, 

*Int. Soc. Rev. Aug. 1907. p. 89. 
flbid. Dec. 1900. p. 341. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 315 

and of so-called patriotisms which the ruling class 
of each nation is seeking to revive, is the power 
which these give to capitalism to keep the workers 
of the world from uniting and to throw them 
against each other in the struggles of contending 
capitalist interests for the control of the yet unex- 
ploited markets of the world, or the remaining 
sources of profit. 

"The socialist movement therefore is a world 
movement. It knows of no conflict of interests be- 
tween the workers of one nation and the workers 
of another. It stands for the freedom of the work- 
ers of all nations; and in so standing, it makes for 
the full freedom of all humanity." 

Closely connected with the denial of political al- 
legiance is anti-militarism. While the former sig- 
nifies disloyalty to particular countries or nations, 
the latter means opposition to the wars and arma- 
ments of the modern State. It is only of late that 
an anti-military movement arose in France and 
Italy; but at present it has spread over all countries 
and was made the subject of a general and very hot 
discussion in the last International Socialist Con- 
gress at Stuttgart 1907. 

Wars, according to socialist views, while they 
entail the greatest sufferings and losses on the 
working people, are carried on merely in the inter- 
est of the capitalist class and necessarily result from 
the economic and political system upheld by capital- 
ism. 



316 Ethics of the State 



The resolution on militarism adopted by the 
Stuttgart Congress reads: 

"Wars between capitalistic states are as a rule 
the consequence of their competition in the world's 
market, for every state is eager not only to pre- 
serve its markets, but also to conquer new ones, 
principally by the subjugation of foreign nations 
and the confiscation of their lands. These wars are 
further engendered by the unceasing and ever in- 
creasing armaments of militarism, which is one of 
the principal instruments for maintaining the pre- 
dominance of the bourgeois classes and for sub- 
jugating the working classes politically as well as 
economically. 

"The breaking out of wars is further favoured 
by the national prejudices systematically culti- 
vated in the interest of the reigning classes, in 
order to turn off the masses of the proletariat 
from the duties of their class and international 
solidarity. 

"Wars are therefore essential to capitalism; they 
will not cease until the capitalistic system has been 
done away with, or until the sacrifices in men and 
money required by the technical development of 
the military system and the revolt against the ar- 
maments have become so great as to compel the na- 
tions to give up this system. 

"Especially the working classes from which the 
soldiers are chiefly recruited, and which have to 
bear the greater part of the financial burdens, are 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 317 



by nature opposed to war, because it is irreconcil- 
able with their aim: the creation of a new eco- 
nomic system founded on a socialistic basis and 
realizing the solidarity of the nations."* 

Armaments and especially the modern standing 
armies are regarded by socialists not only as op- 
pressive of the working classes, which chiefly have 
to do military service, and as instruments of wars 
to be carried on in the interest of capitalism, but 
also as the chief means to keep capitalistic gov- 
ernments in power and to break strikes, when be- 
coming too powerful and too threatening. 

Such being the view taken by socialists of wars 
and armaments, we understand why the Stuttgart 
Congress in the opening sentence of its anti-mili- 
tary resolution declares "that the fight against mili- 
tarism cannot be separated from the socialist strug- 
gle of classes as a whole." 

"The Congress, therefore, considers it to be the 
duty of the working classes, and especially of their 
parliamentary representatives, to fight with all 
their might against the military and naval arma- 
ments, not to grant any money for such purposes, 
to point out at the same time the class character of 
bourgeois society and the real motives for keeping 
up national antagonisms, and further to imbue the 
young people of the working classes with the social- 
ist spirit of universal brotherhood and with class 
consciousness." 

*Int. Soc. Rev. Sept. 1907. pp. 135, 136. 



3 1 8 Ethics of the State 



As effective means for making aggressive wars 
impossible the Congress considers the democratic 
organization of the national defense and the aboli- 
tion of the standing armies, the preparing of the 
minds of the people by an unceasing propaganda, 
and the drawing together of the different national 
labor parties into an international union. 

"In case of war being imminent," the Congress 
says, "the working classes and their parliamentary 
representatives in the countries concerned shall be 
bound, with the assistance of the International So- 
cialist Bureau, to do all they can to prevent the 
breaking out of the war, using for this purpose 
the means which appear to them the most effica- 
cious, and which must naturally vary according to 
the acuteness of the struggle of classes, and to gen- 
eral conditions. 

"In case war should break out, notwithstanding, 
they shall be bound to intervene for its being 
brought to a speedy end, and to employ all their 
forces for utilizing the economical and political 
crisis created by the war, in order to rouse the 
masses of the people and to hasten the downbreak 
of the predominance of the capitalist class." 

To the International Socialist Bureau in Brus- 
sels mentioned in the resolution of the Stuttgart 
Congress, the special task is set of uniting the ac- 
tion of the different socialist parties of the world 
against the breaking out of wars, or during wars 
broken out. A resolution submitted by it to, and 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 319 

accepted by the National Committee of the Social- 
ist Party of America, reads as follows : 

"As soon as a situation shall be presented, which, 
openly or secretly, may give rise to an apprehen- 
sion of a conflict between two or more governments 
and render a war between them possible or prob- 
able, the socialist parties of the countries concerned 
should at once, and upon the invitation of the In- 
ternational Socialist Bureau, enter into direct com- 
munication with a view to determine upon a con- 
certed mode of action on the part of the Socialists 
and workingmen of the interested countries, in or- 
der to prevent the war. At the same time the par- 
ties of the other countries should be advised by the 
Secretary of the Bureau, and a meeting of the In- 
ternational Socialist Bureau should be held as soon 
thereafter as possible for the purpose of devising 
the most appropriate measures to be taken by the 
entire International Socialist movement and the or- 
ganized working class to prevent the war."* 

The Chicago "Daily Socialist" says concerning 
the International Socialist Bureau : 

"In time of war the bureau would at once form 
a means of organized concerted action on the part 
of the Socialists of all parties. It already makes 
possible united, simultaneous agitation on any sub- 
ject of international interest. It was through the 
international bureau that the 'Bloody Sunday' cele- 
brations were organized that brought together mil- 

*See the Worker. Feb. 3, 1906. 



320 



Ethics of the State 



lions of workers speaking every tongue in protest 
against Russian brutality. The bureau also consti- 
tuted the medium through which hundreds of thou- 
sands of dollars have been collected for the Rus- 
sian revolution."* 

The resolution of the Stuttgart Congress, revo- 
lutionary as it is, nevertheless is considered as too 
tame by a large number of socialists. The French 
socialist party, when assembled in a National Con- 
gress at Nancy, a short time before the Interna- 
tional Congress, adopted under the guidance of 
Herve and Jaures a resolution of a far more 
radical tendency. After a general declaration 
against war and militarism it has the following 
conclusion : 

"The Congress . . . considers the international 
solidarity of the proletariat and of the Socialists of 
every nation as their duty . . . (and) invites 
them to render the effect of these decisions 
(against war and militarism) possible by means of 
a plan prepared, ordered, and confined by the na- 
tional and international labor Socialist organiza- 
tion, which shall put forward in every country and 
especially in the countries concerned and according 
to the circumstances of the movement, the whole 
energy and the whole effort of the working class 
and of the Socialist Party for the forestallment 
and prevention of war by every, means begin- 
ning with parliamentary intervention, public agi- 
*Quoted by the Worker. Aug. 17, 1907. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 321 

tation, popular manifestation, even to a general 
labor strike and insurrection."* 

In the Stuttgart Congress the extreme anti-mili- 
tarists of the French delegation proposed, besides 
the general strike and insurrection as means to pre- 
vent war, desertion from the army by enlisted so- 
cialists and refusal to join the colors by the reserv- 
ists. 

In several countries the socialists have resorted 
also to other methods which are expressly men- 
tioned neither in the Stuttgart nor in the Nancy 
resolution. One of them, which deserves particular 
attention, is the spreading of anti-militarism and of 
socialist views in the army and navy. To what ex- 
tent this was done in France, may be understood 
from the following item of the "Worker," May 
19, 1906. 

" 'L'Echo de Paris' prints an interview with a 
French naval officer, who declares that the anti- 
militarists in the navy are numerous and active, 
especially in the Mediterranean squadron, with 
headquarters at Toulon. It was believed, he said, 
that there were men in the crew of every battleship 
and cruiser willing and able to put the vessels out 
of commission by tampering with some vital part, 
in the event of war being declared. This fact 
causes alarm among the higher authorities." 

In 1907 the British Social Democratic Federa- 
tion issued through its Executive Council a mani- 
*Quoted by the Worker. Sept. 28, 1907. 



3 22 



Ethics of the State 



festo protesting in the strongest terms against 
Holdawe's Army Scheme and recommending, in- 
stead of the present army organization, complete 
civilizing of the military service. Besides an ani- 
mating address to the working men, it contains 
an appeal to the reservists which reads in part : 

"Men of the Army Reserve, we especially ap- 
peal to you. Now is your time to organize in your 
own interest. To the political parties of the master 
class you are mere food for powder. Join the So- 
cial Democratic Federation, which has always 
championed the cause of the man in the ranks and 
is now taking the present opportunity to secure the 
redress of the many grievances under which you 
suffer. Think of the brutal military code, under 
which twenty thousand young men are committed 
to the military prisons of this country every year 
for offenses for which they have never had a 
proper trial." 

"Now is the time, men of the Army Reserve, to 
strike for the abolition of the military law, and the 
civilizing of military service. We appeal to you to 
join with us and the whole of the workers of the 
country, in demanding the abolition of militarism, 
of military law, of any form of conscription and 
the establishment of a national citizen force in 
which, while every man will be a soldier, no man 
will cease to be a civilian — the democratic military 
force of the people, the nation in arms."* 
*The Worker. May n, 1907. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 323 

It is a generally known fact that in the recent 
Russian revolution the Army and Navy were in 
many places incited to insurrection by socialist in- 
fluence, and that attempts are made in Germany to 
carry socialism into the army. 

The International Socialist Review, December, 
1906, has an article written by Maurice E. El- 
deridge, in which the socialist influence on the 
European armies is summarily described and a 
method is also proposed for reaching the United 
States army. To quote: 

"In Russia the revolutionary propaganda has so 
completely permeated the regiments of the Czar's 
army that we have lately seen whole regiments 
hoist the flag of revolt and refuse to obey the com- 
mandments of the autocrat. We know that the 
German army is so thoroughly 'class conscious' and 
in sympathy with the great working class move- 
ment that when Kaiser 'Billy' was clamoring for 
war with France a few months ago, he was given 
to understand that the German workingmen had no 
quarrel with their brother workers across the 
border, and the war clouds were wafted away on 
the breezy atmosphere of diplomatic statesman- 
ship. In Belgium the government is confronted 
with a situation which to us is indeed laughable. If 
regiments are drawn from the Flemish provinces 
for duty in the cities, it quickly develops that they 
are but a source of propaganda for socialism, and 
if regiments are drawn from the Walloon prov- 



3 2 4 



Ethics of the State 



inces, they become immediately the willing prey 
of our propagandists." 

"But in America, the land of the free, the home 
of the brave, the land where capitalism and wage 
slavery are in their most highly developed state, 
the military powers are absolutely at the beck and 
call of the capitalist exploiters." 

"Therefore I am of the opinion that it is high 
time that the revolutionary workers in America be- 
gin to consider ways and means for the education 
of our soldiers. Every garrison in the United 
States has a library the shelves of which are heavy 
with books, some worthless fiction but mostly his- 
tories recounting the deeds of soldiers and heroes. 
Every soldier can read and many of them do read 
a great deal. If we can devise means of circulating 
among them the revolutionary literature of the pro- 
letariat, I believe that we can reach many of them 
and eventually win them to the cause of freedom." 

"The regular soldier belongs to the proletariat, 
and too long we have neglected him in our propa- 
ganda work here in America. I have now nearly 
developed a plan to reach the soldiers in our army 
and feel assured that with the hearty co-operation 
of a goodly number of American comrades, we will 
be able to do with the American soldier what our 
comrades in Russia, Germany, Belgium, and other 
European countries have done with their respective 
armies."* 

*Int. Soc. Rev. Dec. 1906. pp. 368, 369. 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 325 



The "Christian Socialist," Chicago, in its issue 
May 15, 1907, contains a circular addressed to all 
socialists, in which the proposal is made to publish 
a special socialist paper for propaganda in the 
Army and Navy of the United States. 

To come back to the clash between the moderate 
and extreme anti-militarists in the Stuttgart Con- 
gress, we should remark that the difference between 
the conflicting factions was only one of tactics and 
not of principles. Neither does the resolution 
finally adopted by the Congress condemn the meas- 
ures proposed by the French delegates as improper 
or morally objectionable, nor did Bebel in his 
powerful speech advance any other reason against 
them than that of impractibility under the present 
circumstances. Algernon Lee, an American dele- 
gate at the Congress, in an article of the "Worker," 
September 7, 1907, very clearly states the reasons 
on which the opposition against the extremist was 
based. Summing them up he says : 

"The opponents of this tendency (the general 
strike and insurrection) do by no means deny the 
propriety of using the proposed methods if prac- 
ticable, nor deny that in a given case they might be 
found practicable. But they emphatically declare 
that it is not wise nor right to issue a general dec- 
laration, in effect to establish an international rule 
prescribing these measures in advance. They think 
we should do more than we promise or threaten to 
do, and that to adopt this resolution would be to 



326 



Ethics of the State 



make a threat and a promise which we might very 
likely be unable to fulfil, and to give advice which 
might very likely result in disaster to those who fol- 
lowed it." 

Nor should the concluding words of the Stutt- 
gart resolution be overlooked. 

"In case of war they (the working classes and 
their parliamentary representatives) shall be bound 
. . . to employ all their forces for utilizing the 
economical and political crisis created by the war, 
in order to rouse the masses of the people and to 
hasten the downbreak of the predominance of the 
capitalist class." 

The breakdown of the predominance of the 
capitalist class in socialist language undoubtedly 
means the overthrow of the existing governments 
and the seizure of the political power by the work- 
ing classes. In economical and political crises, then, 
usually created by wars, the workers should by all 
means seize the opportunity of stirring up a revolu- 
tion and establishing the rule of the proletariat. 

At the end of this rather lengthy discussion on 
the socialist attitude toward the State it is worth 
while to sum up the several conclusions reached. 

Socialism as a theory does not acknowledge any 
power or authority in the present State, nor any 
binding force in the laws enacted by it; for it looks 
on the former merely as a usurped rule and on the 
latter as measures of oppression and exploitation. 
As a movement socialism takes a positively hostile 



Socialist Attitude Toward the State 327 

attitude toward the State, because it aims at its 
overthrow by the class-struggle and at the seizure 
of the powers of government, conceiving them as 
due to the proletariat and as a necessary instrument 
for the establishment of a new social order based 
on collective property. Socialist workingmen, con- 
sistently with their principles, disavow allegiance 
to any particular State or country. They consider 
themselves as the nation itself, but at the same time 
as an integral part of the world-wide international 
union which, being held together by common in- 
terests and carrying on with concerted forces a 
warfare against all capitalistic society, is alone 
competent to bring about the emancipation of the 
human race. Aiming at the destruction of standing 
armies and at the democratization of the national 
defense, they at once attempt to dominate the for- 
eign politics of States and to withdraw from gov- 
ernments the power necessary to keep down internal 
disturbances and revolutions. 

What consequences would attend such an atti- 
tude toward the State, were socialism to spread 
among the masses of the working people, every 
one must see who is to any extent acquainted with 
political life. In fact, the socialists themselves are 
confident that by their methods they will within a 
short time succeed in overthrowing all modern 
States. 



CHAPTER VI 



THE CO-OPERATIVE COMMONWEALTH 

When the struggle between the capitalists, cen- 
tralizing the means of production and the working 
class, degraded to miserable wage-slavery, shall 
have reached its climax, it will result in a revolu- 
tion, by which private property, and with it also 
the State will be abolished. In place of the latter 
a new form of society will develop, more perfect 
than any that has existed heretofore. There will 
be then no distinction and antagonism of classes, 
no predominance of rich over dispossessed, no in- 
stitutions calculated to aid the exploitation of 
labor, no coercive power to enforce the submission 
of subjects. The new society will be a common- 
wealth in which liberty and equality will spontane- 
ously prevail, and the well-being of each will be the 
condition for the well-being of all. Such, we know, 
is the hope of socialists and the prediction of their 
intellectual leaders. 

For our purpose it is necessary to outline in few 
words this new paradise on earth. Its essential fea- 
tures according to the Marxian conception are: 
Collective ownership in all productive means, 
social organization of labor and production on a 
democratic basis, social ownership of the goods 

328 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 329 

produced by co-operative labor, and in consequence 
also social distribution of them, a part of them be- 
ing employed for further production, the rest be- 
ing distributed for consumption.* 

Socialist writers sometimes seriously tell us that 
it is impossible to foresee what form society will 
take after the introduction of collective ownership 
and socialized production; nevertheless, on other 
occasions, they give us a well-detailed description 
of the improved conditions that are to be in the 
new paradise, the co-operative commonwealth. 
Liebknecht accurately forecasts the democratic con- 
stitution of future society. 

4 'In place of the present class rule we will insti- 
tute a free government of the people. The clear 
statement of our party programme stamps as a 
slander the assertion of our opponents that social- 
ism will secure the ruling power in the state for the 
laboring class. We have already said that the idea 
of mastery is above all undemocratic and conse- 
quently in opposition to the principles of socialism. 
All demands for liberty made by democracy are 
likewise demands of the social democracy. The dif- 
ference between democratic and social democratic 
is that the latter sees the consequences which the 
former, entangled in civil prejudices, has not the 
courage to see. Social democracy is consequently 
actual democracy. It will bring into existence an 
organization of the state and society, which, rest- 
*Cathrein. Socialism, pp. 54, 244-256. 



33° 



Ethics of the Stale 



ing on the equality of all men, will choke the source 
of inequality, will tolerate neither ruler nor servant 
and will found a fraternal community of free 
men. * 

Bebel, in his "Woman," draws up a complete 
picture of the order that is to prevail and the hap- 
piness which shall be enjoyed in the socialist com- 
monwealth. 

The organic law of socialized society, he says, 
is the duty to work on the part of all able to work, 
without distinction of sex. The work, however, 
shall be moderate, agreeable, varied, and produc- 
tive, and so conditioned, it will furnish to all the 
means for a pleasant life. 

"Socialist society does not come into existence 
for the purpose of living in proletarian style; 
it comes into existence in order to abolish the 
proletarian style of life for the large majority 
of humanity. It seeks to afford to each and all 
the fullest possible measure of the amenities of 
life."f 

An administration, central and local, chosen by 
the entire people, without distinction of sex, and 
embracing all branches of social activity, shall di- 
rect the entire production, ascertain the needs of all 
and determine accordingly the amount of goods to 
be produced, harmonize and equalize the produc- 

*Socialism, What it Is and What it Seeks to Accomplish. 
Translated by May Wood Simons, p. 8. 
fWoman. p. 275. 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 331 

tive forces, and superintend the work undertaken 
by individuals according to their tastes and capa- 
bilities. Hence shall result a system of labor or- 
ganized on a plan of absolute liberty and demo- 
cratic equality, where each stands for all and all 
stand for each, and where the sense of solidarity 
reigns supreme. In consequence the antagonism of 
interests will be removed. 

"Each unfolds his faculties in his own interest, 
and, by so doing, simultaneously benefits the com- 
mon weal. The gratification of the ego and the pro- 
motion of the common weal harmonize and supple- 
ment each other."* 

Of the extent to which the welfare of all is pro- 
moted, the following statements should give us an 
idea. 

"In Socialist society the only consideration is the 
welfare of its members. Whatever injures them 
must be stopped."f 

"Socialist society produces not 'merchandise' in 
order to 'buy and to sell' ; it produces the neces- 
saries of life, that are used, consumed, and other- 
wise have no object. In socialist society, accord- 
ingly, the capacity to consume is not bounded as in 
bourgeois society, by the individual's capacity to 
buy; it is hounded by the collective capacity to pro- 
duce. If labor and instruments of labor are in ex- 
istence, all wants can be satisfied; the social capac- 

*Ibid. pp. 276-281. 
tlbid. p. 285. 



332 



Ethics of the State 



ity to consume is bounded only by the satisfaction 
of the consumers."* 

As to the cultivation of arts and science, Bebel 
says : 

"It (future society) will have scientists and art- 
ists of all sorts in abundance; but all of them will 
work physically a part of the day, and devote the 
rest, according to their liking, to study, the arts or 
companionable intercourse.^ 

In the new social order, Bebel goes on to 
say, there will be no civil authority, no govern- 
ments, no laws, no courts, no coercive power, no 
armies. 

"Along with the State, die out its representa- 
tives — cabinet ministers, parliaments, standing ar- 
mies, police and constables, courts, district attorneys, 
prison officials, tariff and tax collectors, in short, 
the whole political apparatus. Barracks, and such 
other military structures, places of law and of 
administration, prisons — all will now await better 
use. Ten thousand laws, decrees and regulations 
become so much rubbish; they have only historic 
value." 

All these things will be useless, because the ad- 
ministration of social affairs will be greatly sim- 
plified, all members of society being sincerely inter- 
ested in the common good. 

"The great and yet so petty parliamentary strug- 

*Woman. p. 291. 
flbid. p. 290. 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 333 

gles, with which the men of the tongue imagine 
they guide and rule the world, are no more; they 
will have made room for administrative colleges 
and delegations whose attention will be engaged in 
the best means of production and distribution, in 
ascertaining the volume of supplies needed, in in- 
troducing and applying effective improvements in 
art, in architecture, in intercourse, in the process 
of production, etc. These are practical matters, 
visible and tangible, towards which every one 
stands objectively, there being no personal interests 
hostile to society to affect their judgment. None 
has any interest other than the collectivity, and that 
interest consists in instituting and providing every- 
thing in the best, most effective and most profitable 
manner." 

A coercive power, courts, and prisons in par- 
ticular become unnecessary, because there 
will be neither an occasion nor a motive for 
crimes. 

''Henceforth there are known neither political 
crimes nor common ones. There are no more 
thieves, seeing that private property has ceased to 
be in the means of production, every one can sat- 
isfy his wants with ease and comfort by work. 
Tramps and vagabonds likewise cease to be. They 
are the product of a social system based on private 
property; the former cease to be with the latter. 
And murder? Why? None can grow rich at the 
expense of another. Even murder out of hate and 



334 Ethics of the State 



revenge follows directly or indirectly from the 
modern system. Perjury, false testimony, cheating, 
thefts of inheritance, fraudulent failures? There 
is no private property on and against which to com- 
mit these crimes. Arson ? Who is to derive pleas- 
ure or satisfaction therefrom, seeing that society 
removes from him all sources of hatred? Counter- 
feiting? Why, money has become a chimera, love's 
labor would be lost. Contempt for religion? Non- 
sense. It is left to the 'omnipotent and good God' 
to punish him who should offend Him — provided 
there be still controversies on the existence of 
God."* 

Bebel's view on the absence of law and govern- 
ment in the future society are held by many other 
socialist writers. Before him the communist mani- 
festo (Part II) maintained that with the abolition 
of class distinctions and the concentration of pro- 
duction in the hands of the whole nation, the pub- 
lic power will lose its political character", and that 
the proletariat, when, by a revolution, it shall have 
swept away the old conditions of production and 
with them also the conditions for the existence of 
class antagonisms, will abolish its own supremacy 
as a class. 

W. Morris and B. Bax affirm: 

"As to the political side of the new society, civili- 
zation undertakes the government of persons by 
direct coercion. Socialism would deal primarily 

*Woman. pp. 319, 320. 



The Co-operative Commonzvealth 335 

with the administration of things, and only sec- 
ondarily and indirectly would have to do with per- 
sonal habit and conduct. Civil law, therefore, 
which is an institution essentially based on private 
property, would cease to exist, and criminal law, 
which would tend to be obsolete, would, while it 
existed, concern itself solely with the protection of 
persons."* 

A. M. Simons makes a statement very similar to 
Bebel's when he writes : 

"Socialism points out that the next stage of eco- 
nomic evolution will be co-operative ownership and 
operation of industry. There will be no personal 
advantage in the possession of private property, as 
such ownership will have lost the power to take the 
fruits of others' labor. Hence there will naturally 
be no need of laws to 'protect the rights of private 
property'; under such conditions all the disagree- 
able features of government would disappear. 
Government would simply become an administra- 
tion of industry. . . . In a co-operative com- 
monwealth the government would be little more 
than a gigantic information bureau furnishing the 
citizens exact knowledge regarding the amounts of 
all kinds of commodities required by the commu- 
nity and notifying them where there is need of 
labor to be performed. If comparison is to be 
made at all with present institutions, the gov- 
ernment of the future will be much more like 
*Socialism, Its Growth and Outcome, pp. 289, 290. 



336 



Ethics of the State 



an enormously developed 'statistical bureau' of 
to-day, rather than an overgrown police depart- 
ment."* 

The co-operative commonwealth, based on col- 
lective ownership and on equal rights and freedom 
of all, is considered by socialist writers as a revival 
of primitive society in a higher form. For re- 
turn to the primitive state of mankind is thought 
by them to be the tendency of all social evolution; 
quite consistently, indeed, with the dialectic method 
borrowed by Marx from Hegel, according to 
whose philosophy the negation of the negation, the 

*Socialism vs. Anarchism. Chicago 1901. pp. 14, 15. Morris 
Hillquit is not quite so sanguine as Bebel and many other 
socialists who deny that the co-operative commonwealth will 
take the form of a State. He is decidedly of the opinion that 
it will be a definitely organized society with laws and govern- 
ment. We quote the following passages from his Socialism in 
Theory and Practice, pp. 99, 100. 

"If we realize that the socialist commonwealth must of 
necessity be charged with the direction, regulation or control 
of at least its principal industries, and with the care of its old 
and decrepit, sick, invalid and orphaned members, we shall 
readily see that the socialist organization will have to be 
something more than a mere 'administration of things' — it will 
in all likelihood be a quite definitely organized society." 

"For the purposes of public works, health, safety and relief, 
the socialist commonwealth will need vast material resources, 
probably more than the modern State, and these resources, in 
whatever form and under whatever designation, can come only 
from the wealth-producing members of the commonwealth — 
thus there must be a direct or indirect tax on the labor or 
income of the citizen. The collection of this tax, the direction 
of the industries and the regulation of the relations between 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 337 

reconciliation of the thesis and the antithesis, al- 
ways results in a higher synthesis. 

Engels approvingly quotes Morgan's saying 
that the future society will be a revival in a higher 
form of the liberty, equality, and fraternity of the 
ancient gentes.* 

Bebel develops the same idea at full length. 

"Human society has traversed, in course of 
thousands of years, all the various phases of devel- 
opment, to arrive at the end where it started from, 
— communistic property and complete equality and 
fraternity, but no longer among congeners alone, 
but among the whole human race. In that does the 
great progress consist. . . . Nevertheless while 
man returns to the starting point in his develop- 
ment, the return is effected upon an infinitely higher 
social plane than that from which it started. 
Primitive society held property in common in the 
gens and clan, but only in the rawest and most un- 
developed stage. The process of development that 
took place since, reduced, it is true, the common 

the citizens, will require some laws and some rules and instru- 
ments for their enforcement ; hence, even the element of coer- 
cion cannot be entirely absent in a socialist society, at least 
not as far as the human mind can at present conceive. The 
socialist society as conceived by modern socialists differs, of 
course, very radically from the modern State in form and 
substance. It is not a class state. ... It is not the slave- 
holding state, nor the feudal state, nor the state of the bour- 
geoisie — it is the socialist state, but a state nevertheless." 
*Origin of the Family, etc. p. 217. 



338 



Ethics of the State 



property to a small and insignificant vestige, broke 
up the gentes and finally atomized the whole of 
society; but, simultaneously, it raised mightily the 
productivity of society in its various phases and 
the manifoldness of social necessities, and it 
created out of the gentes and tribes nations 
and great States, although it produced again a 
condition of things that stood in evident contra- 
diction with social requirements. The task 
of the future is to end the contradiction by the 
re-transformation upon the broadest basis of 
property and productive powers into collective 
property. 

"Society retakes what once was its own, but, in 
accordance with the newly created conditions of 
production, it places its whole mode of life upon 
the highest stage of culture, which enables all to 
enjoy what under more primitive circumstances 
was the privilege of individuals or individual 
classes only."* 

Loria connects the beginning and the end of so- 
cial evolution in more poetical language. 

"The final social system ought to present the 
greatest quantitative divergence, and at the same 
time the closest qualitative analogy with the primi- 
tive social form. The last term of history should 
thus reproduce the first. . . . This tendency of 
the stream of life to remount to its sources, this 
circular movement of history, was recognized 
*Woman. pp. 347, 348. 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 339 



intuitively by primitive peoples, who repre- 
sent the course of historical development by a 
circle." 

"Such is the history of the human race. Out of 
the brute felicity of primitive communism mankind 
was cast forth upon the storms and vicissitudes of 
property. Under the stress of such conditions he 
has passed through centuries of struggle and mar- 
tyrdom, until he has finally come to the last stage 
of his journey, and under the serene skies of a more 
equitable social system, he now sees peace and jus- 
tice at last in the conditions of the earlier age, since 
ripened by civilisation."* 

E. Ferri improves on Loria when he says : 

"The track of social evolution is not presented 
by a closed circle, which, like the serpent in the old 
symbol, cuts off all hope of a better future, but, to 
use the figure of Goethe, is represented by a spiral, 
which seems to return upon itself, but which ad- 
vances and ascends."f 

Shall social evolution after this return to its 
starting point have reached its end? According to 
the glowing descriptions which represent the co- 
operative commonwealth as the paradise of man- 
kind, as the highest grade of culture, peace, and 
happiness, we should think that there could not 
be a state of higher perfection beyond it. But ac- 
cording to the dialectic method, evolution goes on 

' *Economic Foundations of Society, pp. 352, 353. 
t Socialism and Modern Science, p. 109. 



34o 



Ethics of the State 



without an end, in such a manner that every stage 
of development is followed by another, and every 
synthesis is resolved again into an antagonism be- 
tween thesis and antithesis. Plainly there is 
here some inconsistency in socialist philosophy. 
Either the co-operative commonwealth will, 
after some time, just like ancient barbarism of 
which it is but a higher form, come to an end, 
or dialectic evolutionism needs an essential cor- 
rection. 

The future society as described by the authors 
quoted is clad in such splendor as should dazzle 
the eyes of all that take a glance at it, even though 
only from a great distance, and gladden the hearts 
of those who now pine away in misery and oppres- 
sion. Nevertheless there is also a very dark side to 
it. As such we must characterize its very birth. 
True, the co-operative commonwealth is conceived 
by socialist philosophers as the natural outcome of 
social evolution now approaching its ultimate stage. 
Capitalist society, as Marx long ago foretold, is 
doomed to perish by its own intrinsic contradic- 
tions and already shows all the symptoms of a 
speedy dissolution. But, while decaying, it pre- 
pares in its bosom the form of a new society. The 
very centralization of production, which is the 
cause of the destruction of capitalism, is also the be- 
ginning of the socialization of industry. Thus 
with the downfall of the capitalist State and on its 
ruins will, by a natural process, rise a new society 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 341 

in which property and production shall be so- 
cialized under the control and management of 
the entire people. Socialist writers often call 
attention to this natural rise of the co-opera- 
tive commonwealth, both to show its inevita- 
ble necessity and to allay fears of calamities 
and catastrophes which might seem to attend its 
foundation. 

But at the same time they do not fail to fore- 
warn us that this new era will be ushered in by a 
revolution, the greatest of all that have taken place 
in history. Capitalism, they again and again re- 
peat, can not be overcome but by a most embittered 
class-struggle, in which the united proletariat of 
the world will obtain the final victory. Once vic- 
torious, the proletariat will overthrow all govern- 
ments, seize the public powers, expropriate private 
owners, bring all production and distribution of 
goods produced under socialized control. This is 
a thorough and universal revolution, political, so- 
cial, economic, and, as was shown above, also re- 
ligious, domestic, and educational; a revolution 
which, reaching the very foundations of society, 
pervading all provinces of human life and extend- 
ing over all the civilized world, can not be brought 
about in one or two years, but implies a protracted 
period of transition from the old to the new order; 
a revolution which will be accomplished by a pro- 
letarian government. For during the transition 
period there will exist a proletarian State according 



342 



Ethics of the State 



to Gabriel Deville* and Morris Hillquit,f or a' 
proletarian dictatorship according to Marx. The 
latter says in his criticism of the program submitted 
to the Gotha Congress: 

"Between the capitalist and the communist 
society, lies the period of the revolutionary 
transformation of the one into the other. To 
this there corresponds also a political transi- 
tion period, in which the state can be nothing else 
than the revolutionary dictatorship of the pro- 
letariat.'^ 

And finally this is revolution that can not be but 
violent. True, revolutionary socialism professes to 
use legal and political means for the achievement 
of its end. But this holds good as a rule only in 
times and in countries where political means are at 
hand sufficient for the purposes to be accomplished. 
Where they are wanting or insufficient, social- 
ists openly profess that they consider themselves 
justified in having recourse to violence, pro- 
vided that there be hope of achieving success by 
it. 

That in saying so we are not mistaken, we un- 
derstand from a passage in "The Worker," April 
28, 1906, in which the methods employed by the 
socialists in their struggle for victory are specified 
as follows: 

*State and Socialism, p. 42. 

fSocialism in Theory and Practice, pp. 100-105. 

flnt. Soc. Rev. May 1908. p. 656. 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 343 

"Wherever possible it (Socialism) uses political 
action as its chief method. Side by side with this, 
separate but parallel, goes on the trade union move- 
ment of the working class, generally larger in num- 
bers, but less far-reaching in its aims; the two if 
wisely used, do not conflict, but support each other. 
In various countries, to a greater or less extent, we 
have also the co-operative movement as an auxili- 
ary to the political party of the workers or to their 
trade unions, or to both. In countries where polit- 
ical or civil rights are denied to the workers or 
greatly restricted, as in Russia, the method of 
physical forces is used — either in the form of as- 
sassination of despots or in that of armed insur- 
rection by the workers and mutiny in the army and 
navy. At times the general strike is also used 
as a revolutionary weapon to compel the exten- 
sion of the suffrage or to prevent the enforce- 
ment of reactionary measures. But in the 
United States, where manhood suffrage and 
legal freedom of speech and press and organiza- 
tion generally prevail, political action is the 
most important function of the Socialist move- 
ment." 

Other writers are still more positive in justifying 
the use of violence. Hermon Titus in a letter writ- 
ten to "The Worker" during the Haywood trial, 
1907, affirms: 

"We are not weak enough to shrink from phys- 
ical force when progress requires it, but we are not 



344 



Ethics of the State 



foolish enough or inhuman enough to employ it 
without avail."* 

Chas H. Kerr, discussing the means which the 
Socialist Party of America is to employ in the 
struggle against capitalism, says : 

"As to the means by which the capitalist class 
is to be overthrown, the real question worth 
considering is what means will prove most effective. 
If it could best be done by working for 'one thing 
at a time' and bidding for the votes of the people 
who have no idea what the class-struggle means, 
we should no doubt favor that method. But his- 
tory has made it very clear that such a method is 
a dead failure. ... If, on the other hand, the 
working class could best gain power by taking up 
arms, just as the capitalist class did when it dis- 
lodged the land-holding nobility from power, why 
not?"f 

The socialist press bestows the highest praises, 
on the comrades who have used violence against 
existing governments, and extols as heroes the 
members of the Paris Commune who lost their life 
in the war against the State, as well as the red 
revolutionists in Russia who in our day had re- 
course to bloodshed and assassination. And why 
should it not? 

According to socialist ethics all means are mor- 
ally good which lead to the victory of the prole- 

*Worker. June 22, 1907. 

fWhat to Read on Socialism. Nov. 1906. Chicago, p. 10. 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 345 

tariat. Why, then, should violence not be justified, 
if it brings success? The working class is the only 
class that has the right and power to be, it is 
society, the nation, the true public, while capital- 
ism is but a cancer of the social organism. Why 
should it not employ violence, when deemed an 
effective means for emancipation, conquest of 
power, and introduction of collectivism? 

That the revolution will in reality be brought 
about by violent means the highest socialist authori- 
ties foretell in positive terms. We read in the 
communist manifesto: 

"The proletariat, the lowest stratum of our 
present society, cannot stir, cannot raise itself up, 
without the whole super-incumbent strata of of- 
ficial society being sprung up into the air. 

"In depicting the most general phases of the 
development of the proletariat, we traced the more 
or less veiled civil war, raging within existing civil 
society, up to the point where that war breaks out 
into open revolution, and where the violent over- 
throw of the bourgeoisie lays the foundation for 
the sway of the proletariat. 

"The proletariat will use its political supremacy 
to wrest, by degrees, all capital from the bour- 
geoisie, to centralize all instruments of production 
in the hands of the State, i.e., of the proletariat 
organized as the ruling class, and to increase 
the total of productive forces as rapidly as pos- 
sible. 



34^ 



Ethics of the State 



"Of course, in the beginning this cannot be ef- 
fected except by means of despotic inroads on the 
rights of property and on the conditions of bour- 
geois production; by means of measures, there- 
fore, which appear economically insufficient and 
untenable, but which, in the course of the move- 
ment, outstrip themselves, necessitate further in- 
roads upon the old social order and are unavoid- 
able as a means of entirely revolutionizing the mode 
of production." 

At the congress of The Hague, 1872, Marx de- 
clared: 

u In most countries of Europe violence must be 
the lever of our social reform. We must finally 
have recourse to violence in order to establish the 
rule of labor. . . . The revolution must be uni- 
versal, and we find a conspicuous example in the 
Commune of Paris, which has failed because in 
other capitals — Berlin and Madrid — a simultane- 
ous revolutionary movement did not break out in 
connection with this mighty upheaval of the prole- 
tariat of Paris."* 

Bebel in his work u Unsere Ziele" (p. 44) 
writes as follows on the use of violence : 

"We must not shudder at the thought of the 
possible employment of violence; we must not raise 
an alarm cry at the suppression of 'existing rights/ 
at violent expropriation, etc. History teaches us 
that at all times new ideas, as a rule, were realized 
*Quoted by Cathrein. Socialism, p. 209. 



Whe Co-operative Commonwealth 347 



by a violent conflict with the defenders of the past, 
and that the combatants for new ideas struck blows 
as deadly as possible at the defenders of antiquity. 
Not without reason does Karl Marx in his work 
on 'Capital' exclaim: 

"Violence is the obstetrician that waits on every 
ancient society that is to give birth to a new one; 
violence is itself a social factor."* 

Dietzgen advances a like reason for the neces- 
sity of a violent revolution. 

"O, ye short-sighted and narrow-minded, who 
cannot give up the fad of the moderate organic 
progress! Don't you perceive that all our great 
liberal passions sink to the level of mere trifling, 
because the great question of social salvation is on 
the order of the day ? Don't you perceive that strug- 
gle and destruction must precede peace and con- 
struction, and that chaotic accumulation of material 
is the necessary condition of systematic organiza- 
tion, just as the calm precedes the tempest and the 
latter the general purification of the air? . . . 
History stands still, because she gathers force for 
a great catastrophe. "f 

Bax advises a sudden and drastic expropriation 
of the capitalists by the proletariat as the best 
method of establishing the new order. 

" Justice," he says, "being henceforth (after the 
victory of the proletariat) identified with con- 

^Quoted by Cathrein. Ibid. 

f Philosophical Essays, pp. 99, 100. 



348 



Ethics of the State 



fiscation and injustice with the rights of prop- 
erty, there remains only the question of the 
'ways and means.' Our bourgeois apologist, ad- 
mitting as he must that the present possessors of 
land and capital hold possession of them simply by 
right of superior force, can hardly refuse to admit 
the right of the proletariat organised to that end 
to take possession of them by right of superior 
force. The only question remaining is how? And 
the only answer is how you can. Get what you can 
that tends in the right direction, by parliamentary 
action or otherwise, bien entendu, the right direc- 
tion meaning that which curtails the capitalist's 
power of exploitation. If you choose to ask further 
how one would like it, the reply is so far as the 
present writer is concerned, one would like it to 
come as drastically as possible, as the moral effect 
of sudden expropriation would be much greater 
than that of any gradual process. But the sudden 
expropriation, in other words, the revolutionary 
crisis, will have to be led up by a series of non-revo- 
lutionary political acts. . . . When that crisis 
comes the great act of confiscation will be the seal 
of the new era; then and not until then will the 
knell of Civilization, with its right of property and 
its class-society, be sounded; then and not until then 
will Justice — the Justice not of Civilization but of 
Socialism — become the corner-stone of the social 
arch."* 
*Ethics of Socialism, p. 82. 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 349 

Dr. E. Kaeser in his work u Der Sozialdemocrat 
Hat das Wort" (pp. 1-10) quotes from the min- 
utes of socialist conventions and congresses at 
Wyden (in Switzerland) 1880, Copenhagen 1883, 
St. Gall 1887, Halle 1890, Erfurt 1891, Stuttgart 
1898, as also from those of the International Con- 
gresses of Laborers at Paris 1889, and Zurich 
1893, numerous utterances and addresses made by 
prominent socialist leaders and applauded by the 
assembled delegates, in which a violent and even 
bloody revolution is not only justified, but also ad- 
vocated as a necessary measure. 

A future social order, a commonwealth estab- 
lished by means of a violent and even bloody revo- 
lution, undoubtedly presents a very dark side, so 
dark, indeed, that besides a discontented prole- 
tariat nobody can be anxious to see its advent. For 
what else is its coming than a time of war and op- 
pression, a devastating storm, a most distressful 
catastrophe ? It will, of course, be said that these 
gloomy days will be only transient like a tempest 
that opens a beautiful springtide. But this seems 
to be rather a vain hope. The stormy period of 
transition from the old to the new order can not, 
as already stated, be of short duration, but requires 
a length of time which nobody can define. Nay, if 
the entire ethical system of socialism is taken into 
consideration, it seems very doubtful, whether it 
will run out into the halcyon days of the long- 
expected co-operative commonwealth and not 



3 S° Ethics of the State 

into an era of chaotic disorder. But this ques- 
tion we reserve for discussion in our concluding 
treatise. 

To review in brief the socialist theory of the 
State, we must grant that it is in every respect new 
and unprecedented. It is new in that it takes the 
State not for an institution of nature, but as a stage 
of social development consequent on the introduc- 
tion of private property; new in that it regards the 
same not as necessary for the welfare of the human 
race during its earthly existence, but for that of the 
few only who have possessed themselves of the 
wealth of the earth by the exploitation of the 
many; new also in that according to it civil society 
is not ruled by authority of a moral nature, but by 
mere physical superiority and coercion, and directed 
by laws which do not aim at protection of rights 
and freedom in general, but at oppression of the 
mass of the people; and new, finally, in that the 
entire social order existing at present is by its very 
nature doomed to downfall and destruction, to 
make room for a new form of society in which 
morality, freedom, and happiness will be supreme 
without duties, without laws, without governments. 
Upon inquiring into the basis of this new theory, 
we find that it rests entirely on evolutionary ma- 
terialism and especially on the materialistic concep- 
tion of history, upon which it is built with remark- 
able consistency. But resting on such foundations it 
is open to all the objections to which they are. It 



The Co-operative Commonwealth 351 



is a one-sided interpretation both of history and of 
society. It adopts as basic principles Morgan's 
ethnographical views, though they rest to a great 
extent not on scientific inquiry but on evolutionary 
presuppositions, and though they have been proved 
to be incorrect by the researches of most reliable au- 
thorities. It recognizes as the chief and ultimate 
cause of historical events no other than economic 
factors and merely egoistic motives as manifested 
in embittered class-struggles, though the influence 
of higher and spiritual ideals, which are far above 
material and individual and even national inter- 
ests, is altogether undeniable. It finds in the his- 
tory of all civilized ages nothing but oppression 
and misery on the part of the lower classes, and 
nothing but injustice, exploitation, and luxury on 
the part of the wealthy, notwithstanding the great 
deeds that have been achieved for the advancement of 
material welfare, of mental culture, and of morals. 
It altogether ignores the nature both of man and 
of society. For, recognizing in man none but ma- 
terial powers and faculties, it stigmatizes all ra- 
tional sciences as false ideologies, as absurd 
and fictitious abstractions, despite the fact that 
the achievements of the human mind since the 
dawn of civilization are of all the most wonder- 
ful. 

Again it represents society merely as the out- 
come of private property relations and as organized 
to keep the laboring population in subjection and 



352 



Ethics of the State 



miserable servitude, whereas social union is a de- 
mand of human nature, and has in the course of 
time been a source of uncounted benefits for the 
human race and especially for those in need and 
wretchedness. Finally, while it is utterly pessi- 
mistic with regard to all former ages under civiliza- 
tion, characterizing them as corrupt, immoral, 
superstitious, and ignorant, it indulges in the rosiest 
optimism with regard to future society under pro- 
letarian administration. 



CONCLUSION 



Our discussions on the religious and moral atti- 
tude of socialism are coming to a close. After hav- 
ing in a former work, "The Characteristics and 
the Religion of Modern Socialism," examined the 
socialist teaching concerning God, the Creator, and 
Christ, the Redeemer, concerning religion in gen- 
eral and Christianity in particular, concerning the 
nature of man, the spirituality and immortality of 
the soul, we have in the present volume subjected 
socialist ethics to a critical analysis. We have 
searched the very foundations, which socialist phi- 
losophers have laid for morality, and scrutinized 
the views which they hold on law, sanction, obliga- 
tion, conscience, and motives of right action. 
Thence proceeding to the precepts for individual 
conduct and to the theory of society, we have seen 
what stages they distinguish in social evolution, 
what evils they find in the present civilization, the 
family, and the State, what remedies and reforms 
they advise, to what ultimate form of society they 
look forward after the introduction of socialized 
property and control of production, and what du- 
ties they regard as essential to social life in its ap- 
proaching completion. 

One thing remains to be done. We still have to 
determine the final outcome of socialism both as a 

353 



354 



Conclusion 



social movement and as a scientific system bearing 
on religion and morality. For this purpose we shall 
retrace our steps over the wide field we have cov- 
ered. To do so, we shall first turn our thought to 
the method we have followed in our discussions, in 
order to test the solidity of our deductions; then, 
after having recapitulated and summarized the 
conclusions reached in our several treatises, we 
shall point out the final result to which they, taken 
as a whole, must lead with logical and moral 
necessity. 

I 

THE METHOD EMPLOYED IN THE PRECEDING 

DISCUSSIONS 

As to the method we have employed thus far, 
the reader will easily remember the way we have 
always proceeded. We have in the first place set 
forth the teachings of the founders and chief ex- 
ponents of scientific socialism, especially of Marx 
and Engels, who are still recognized as the 
classical authors, from whom the true and genuine 
theory of socialism should be learned. Then we 
have rendered the views of later and more recent 
writers, who, after commenting upon and com- 
pleting the fundamental tenets of the former in 
accordance with modern views, are spreading them 
nowadays among the masses in a more popular 
form. The teaching of both the one and the other 



Conclusion 



355 



class of authors we have ascertained in most cases 
by recurring directly to their own writings, and 
when this was not possible, to altogether reliable 
secondary sources. Our quotations from standard 
works of the classical authors, because usually ex- 
tensive, afford a full understanding of the genuine 
socialist theory; those taken from the writings of 
later expounders, various and numerous as they are, 
contain the views of nearly all contemporary lead- 
ers of the socialist movement. 

That we have, indeed, set forth the genuine 
socialist philosophy, must be inferred from the 
perfect agreement which we find in all essentials 
among the various authors quoted. We have 
heard socialists from nearly all civilized countries, 
of every time and date from 1848, when the com- 
munist manifesto was published, down to the In- 
ternational Congress at Stuttgart in 1907, men of 
divers conditions and callings in life, of different 
grades of culture and of various nationalities. 
And what is the outcome? At least as far as the 
revolutionary wing is concerned, which forms the 
main body of the socialist army, they all ex- 
pound substantially the same doctrine. They all 
profess the same fundamental tenets explained 
by Marx and Engels; espouse evolutionary ma- 
terialism and, consequently, oppose Christianity 
and, in general, any form of divine worship; re- 
gard economic conditions as the ultimate basis of 
religion, morals, science, and social life; consider 



Conclusion 



private property in the means of production as 
the cause of all corruption, immorality, and op- 
pression in modern society; look upon the mon- 
ogamous family and the State as merely capitalistic 
institutions contrary to nature and doomed to dis- 
appear; stir up an irreconcilable class struggle, in 
order to emancipate the dispossessed proletariat, 
to seize political power, and found on the basis of 
collectivism a new commonwealth in which happi- 
ness, freedom, and equality shall be guaranteed to 
all without distinction. Though differing in minor 
details, their views supplement one another and, 
built up on the same basis, constitute one complete 
economic, social, and political system. Thus cor- 
roborated by their mutual agreement, our quota- 
tions can not possibly be an untrue or distorted 
statement of the socialist theory. 

We deem these remarks necessary on account of 
the tactics constantly followed by socialists. When 
attacked, they nearly always complain of misstate- 
ments and misrepresentations, to which their doc- 
trine is subjected, and, to disprove the arguments 
advanced against their teachings, prefer against 
their adversaries even charges of deliberate and 
malicious untruthfulness. We have carefully 
avoided anything that might give reason for such 
complaints. 

The charge of dishonesty so frequently pre- 
ferred by socialists against their opponents justi- 
fies in this place some exposition of their own tac- 



Conclusion 



357 



tics, to ascertain the degree of honesty which they 
themselves observe in their controversies. For he 
who demands fairness of others is expected to re- 
gard strict fairness on his part as an indispensable 
duty, and, if found to be wanting in it, is considered 
to have forfeited his right of complaining. What, 
then, do we constantly observe in this regard in so- 
cialist writers and speakers? 

They profess the socialist theory as conceived 
and set forth by Marx and Engels — scientific so- 
cialism — but when the latter are attacked, they shift 
their position by modifying their masters' teachings. 
They advertise and praise certain writings of their 
intellectual leaders as standard works from which 
genuine socialism must be learned, yet when the 
doctrines contained in them are refuted, they ap- 
peal to their platforms as symbols of their faith. 
They glory in materialistic evolution as the only 
true scientific system and maintain it to be funda- 
mental to their philosophy; but when they are ac- 
cused of materialism, they answer that some only 
of their rank are materialists and atheists, and even 
these not as socialists, but only as individuals. 
They most fiercely attack religion and especially 
Christianity, impugning its very foundation and 
proposing measures for its complete suppression; 
but when called to account, disown hostility and 
profess the sincerest religious toleration. In full 
consistency with the materialistic conception of his- 
tory, they condemn in the most outspoken terms 



V 



358 



Conclusion 



monogamous marriage and propose free-love as 
the ideal sexual relation; but protest indignantly 
when accused of undermining the sacredness, unity, 
and existence of the family. If socialism can at any 
moment alter its tenets as a chameleon changes its 
colors, then, indeed, its advocates may on every 
occasion charge their opponents with misrepresen- 
tation. But who does not see that such tactics are 
foul play? 

Carrying on an unrelenting war against the 
Catholic Church in particular, they never tire of 
condemning its doctrines as false and absurd, of 
reviling every one of its institutions, of discrediting 
its noblest works of charity, of charging it with 
hypocrisy and self-interest, with neglecting the poor 
and ignorant, with co-operation with the capitalists 
in oppressing the dispossessed classes. In the mean- 
time it is quite evident that they are utterly igno- 
rant of all Catholic teaching; that they have alto- 
gether neglected to study the genuine sources in 
which Catholic dogma is contained, or the classical 
and recognized theological authors by whom it is 
explained; nay, that they have not even attentively 
perused a catechism in which the elements of Chris- 
tian faith are set forth. Nor have they ever closely 
inspected Catholic institutions, or taken care to 
measure the extent of the w T ork which the Church 
has undertaken during so many centuries for the 
improvement of morals, the advancement of arts 
and science, and the relief of the poor, the sick, and 



Conclusion 



359 



the oppressed. They overlook the grand monu- 
ments still extant as proofs of the mission she has 
fulfilled and remain unacquainted with the many 
and most reliable researches which have been made 
in our very day, to bring to light the history of the 
Christian era. Or if they have any knowledge of 
their existence, they set them aside and draw their 
information from authors who, full of prejudice 
and inflamed with hatred against Christianity, dis- 
tort what is good and grand in it, and with special 
predilection relate and exaggerate the faults they 
can descry in its adherents. 

We abstain from further recriminations. Only 
one remark we can not refrain from adding as a 
necessary conclusion. It is to the effect that social- 
ists, when accusing their opponents of dishonesty, 
while they themselves employ the most unfair 
methods to defend their system or to refute ob- 
jections raised against their teachings, in all justice 
deserve to be ruled out of court. 

II 

THE CONCLUSIONS ARRIVED AT 

But to return to our subject. What conclusions 
have we arrived at by our method of inquiring into 
the doctrinal system of socialism, that is, by repro- 
ducing the views of leading socialist writers in their 
own words in lengthy and numerous quotations? 



360 



Conclusion 



As evolutionary materialists, modern socialists 
have completely done away with the spiritual or 
immaterial order of things. According to their 
philosophy there is no supreme supramundane Be- 
ing, no God, self-existent, infinite, and eternal, no 
Ultimate Cause, Creator, and Ruler of this visible 
universe. Nor is there in man a spiritual and im- 
mortal soul distinct from his physical organism. 
The only reality they admit is matter. 

And what is matter itself? The socialists, as em- 
piricists, find in the material world nothing but 
qualities that strike the senses, without a substratum 
underlying them; as evolutionists, nothing but fleet- 
ing phenomena which succeed one another in an 
uninterrupted series without an element persistent 
in them. Matter, indeed, is thus reduced to a very 
thin and flimsy reality. 

The ever-succeeding phenomena, both physical 
and psychical, are produced by no other than ma- 
terial forces and organic faculties, and governed 
and reduced to order by no other laws than those 
common to the whole material universe. There 
are, therefore, no supersensible, eternal, unchange- 
able truths; no ideals, which, shining above the 
ever-changing world, enlighten the mind; no rules 
of a divine or superhuman origin that direct and 
elevate the human will. Religion conceived as a di- 
vine worship is, consequently, only absurd supersti- 
tion; Church and Christianity, as they now exist, 
are human institutions organized by the possessing 



Conclusion 



361 



classes for the purpose of consolidating their rule 
and of furthering the oppression and exploitation 
of the working people. Religious creeds of any 
description will disappear with the spreading of 
materialistic science and with the abolition of the 
present economic conditions on which they rest as 
their natural basis. 

Morality, likewise, is shattered to its founda- 
tions. There is, according to socialist philosophy, 
no essential distinction between good and evil, in so 
much that the same actions which are good at one 
time may be bad at another and vice versa. What- 
ever furthers at any time the social interests, in ac- 
cordance with prevailing economic conditions, is 
morally good; hence morality is different in primi- 
tive, slave, feudal, capitalistic, and future society. 

There is no divine supreme good, for which man 
is made and in the possession of which he is des- 
tined to attain happiness in an immortal life to 
come; man's end is the temporal welfare of the 
society of which he is a member. There is no di- 
vine lawgiver who enacts moral laws and sanctions 
them by dealing out rewards for their observance 
and punishments for their transgression; no moral 
obligation binding in conscience, no free will and, 
consequently, no responsibility for actions done or 
omitted. The moral precepts that are acknowl- 
edged to exist are but temporary and changeable; 
for they are said to result in part from social needs 
and economic conditions, in part from the social 



362 



Conclusion 



instinct developed in man by gradual evolution, an 
instinct merely organic and in its kind not higher 
than that of reproduction. Precepts of this sort 
are enforced by physical coercion and public opinion 
as long as society is yet imperfect, but need no 
sanction when social evolution will have reached its 
last stage. 

Lastly, the realm of morality is reduced to a 
minimum. Private or individual conduct does not 
belong to, but is altogether outside of it. Sexual 
and matrimonial relations likewise, because they 
are considered to be private, are exempt from 
moral precepts and left merely to the direction of 
good taste. The proper sphere of morality is so- 
cial life. But, in the present order of things and 
under the economic conditions now prevailing, 
when the working class is growing into power, the 
laws of the State are no longer moral and of bind- 
ing force, because they are not enacted by legiti- 
mate authority and tend only to oppression of the 
majority, the real body of society. At present only 
those actions are morally good which make for the 
overthrow of the capitalistic rule and only those 
are bad which retard the victory of the proletariat. 

As the moral so also the social order now exist- 
ing loses its ground and is overthrown. The so- 
cieties which civilization has brought into being are 
doomed to extinction. Monogamous marriage will 
be abolished and in its stead free-love marriage 
will come in vogue, which, lacking unity and stabil- 



Conclusion 



363 



Ity, can not be considered as a society in the proper 
sense. Parental society, likewise, will disappear, be- 
cause the commonwealth will take upon itself the 
education of children. Private associations for the 
purpose of production or distribution, the relations 
between master and servant, employer and em- 
ployee will be discontinued, and even the State will 
die out. For all these societies were built on the 
basis of private property in the productive means, 
and hence with the introduction of collectivism 
must vanish by natural necessity. 

This is a short and plain recapitulation of the 
conclusions we have arrived at. Every clause con- 
tained in it was discussed at full length in the pre- 
ceding treatises; every particular conclusion, as the 
reader may remember, was inferred either from the 
fundamental tenets of socialism, or from the utter- 
ances of socialist speakers and writers. Nor is this, 
we may add, only our own recapitulation of the so- 
cialist theory. Robert Rives La Monte similarly 
sums up his work, "Socialism, Positive and Nega- 
tive," in the following words: 

"The thesis, that the realization of the socialist 
ideal involves the atrophy of Religion, the meta- 
morphosis of the Family, and the suicide of the 
State, would now appear to be sufficiently demon- 
strated."* 

To concentrate our conclusions still further and 
to sum them up in one word, we may say that we 

*Socialism, Positive and Negative, p. 114. 



Conclusion 



have found socialism to be of a destructive nature. 
For, it works utter destruction both from a theo- 
retical and a practical point of view; from the one 
it denies all reality except the phenomena proper 
to matter, from the other it tends to shatter the 
triple order, or the triple realm, in which hereto- 
fore men were living, religion, morality, and so- 
ciety. 

But though this be so and be even granted by 
consistent socialists, it is nevertheless denied that 
universal destruction is the last outcome of social- 
ism. Destruction, according to the evolutionary the- 
ory, is the rise of new life, and the disappearance 
of one form implies the sprouting forth of another. 
Socialism, it is said, is the negation of superstition, 
error, and falsehood; it gives the death blow to a 
decrepit order of things which is the embodiment 
of wrong and injustice, and by this very fact brings 
into existence a new order of truth, peace, justice, 
and happiness. Hence it is maintained that social- 
ism, though it is at first destructive, is ultimately 
constructive, even more than any other philosoph- 
ical system or social movement has been hereto- 
fore. 

Hence arises the last question we have to solve 
before concluding. 



Conclusion 



365 



III 

THE FINAL OUTCOME OF SOCIALISM 

To make good their contention, socialist philos- 
ophers ought to prove two things : first, that their 
theory is a negation of error, superstition, hypoc- 
risy, and systematical oppression, and secondly, 
that after they have completed their work of de- 
struction, there will still remain a solid foundation 
for a better order of society. That theism, Chris- 
tianity, Christian ethics are merely error and hy- 
pocrisy, and the social order based on Christian 
morals is a system of oppression, socialists certainly 
have not yet proved, and, we may confidently say, 
will never be able to prove. But this point we need 
not discuss here. We direct our attention chiefly 
to the question, whether, when socialistic destruc- 
tion shall be completed, a seed will yet be left, 
from which a new and higher life may sprout, or 
a basis on which a better order of human relations 
may be built up. 

Since religion, as far as it is worship of a per- 
sonal deity, will die out in future society according 
to socialist views, and humanitarianism, which some 
would fain substitute for it, coincides with moral- 
ity, the question here to be discussed directly con- 
cerns only the moral and the social order. What 
foundations, then, will remain for these two orders 
after the great socialist revolution both in life and 



366 



Conclusion 



philosophy shall be accomplished? On what basis 
may morality still be built up, when belief in God, 
the supreme good, the supreme Lord, Ruler, and 
Lawgiver has been uprooted, when conscience, 
moral obligation, and responsibility have been done 
away with, and divine sanction of the moral law, 
especially beyond the grave, has been declared to be 
a fiction? And on what ground can society rest, if 
the family and the State are not institutions of ra- 
tional nature or rather of the Creator and Orderer 
of it, but the result of ever changing economic con- 
ditions; if the members which compose it are nat- 
urally free, independent, equal in rights, and under 
no authority of human or divine law, but directed 
only by their innate instincts and inclinations ? 

In Part I, Chapter V, we related that several at- 
tempts have been made by socialist philosophers to 
reconstruct the moral and social order even under 
the presuppositions just mentioned. They may in 
short be reduced to two classes, which, though start- 
ing from opposite points of view, aim at the same 
object. The one derives righteousness of conduct 
directly from the influence of better environment, 
the other, on the contrary, from social instincts 
developed and perfected under the normal eco- 
nomic conditions which are to exist in future so- 
ciety. The latter kind of attempts suited the more 
sanguine socialists, as Marx, Engels, Kautsky, Un- 
termann, Herron; the former those of a more re- 
alistic disposition, like Achille Loria. 



Conclusion 



367 



In all such reconstructive attempts made by so- 
cialists the moral and the social order are supposed 
to coincide completely; and morality is assumed to 
be not of a spiritual, but of a bodily and organic 
nature, because resulting from external and ma- 
terial causes or merely animal and organic instincts 
and dispositions. Of course, it might at once be 
objected that this is not the morality proper to ra- 
tional and free man, endowed with the knowledge 
of higher and immaterial goods and naturally as- 
piring to supersensible and imperishable ends, and 
that, on this account, every reconstruction of true 
morality founded on socialist philosophy is in ad- 
vance sure to be a failure. But we waive this point. 
For the present we only inquire whether socialists 
may succeed at least in reconstructing on the basis 
left for them such materialistic morality as they 
foretell will prevail in the coming co-operative com- 
monwealth. 

Let us first examine Loria's attempt in particular. 
Not believing in the possibility of changing human 
nature in itself, he is of the opinion that under an 
economic system, in which all men will be free and 
equal, motives for doing wrong will be totally ab- 
sent.* 

Even were in final society such an economic en- 
vironment to exist as will ensure freedom and 
equality to all, free land economy and mixed as- 
sociation of labor, undoubtedly man would abstain 
*Ecouomic Foundations of Society, pp. 13-16. 



3 68 



Conclusion 



from injury and usurpation only in the supposition 
that he be free from passion and obey in his actions 
only the dictates of cool reason. For as long as pas- 
sionate impulses exercise an influence on human 
conduct, men will, blindfolded as it were, often do 
what turns to their disadvantage and even to their 
destruction. But that under economic conditions, in 
which men are free and equal, passions will become 
extinct in the human heart, Loria can not admit. 
He would, if he did, contradict himself, since he 
does not believe in the possibility of changing hu- 
man nature. 

This, how T ever, is not the main difficulty he has 
to encounter in defending his theory. The first 
question that presents itself is, whether economic 
conditions, under which freedom and equality of 
all are guaranteed, can subsist among men for any 
length of time. Under his presuppositions the an- 
swer can not but be in the negative. He supposes 
men moved and guided only by egoistic instincts 
and propensities, subject to no superior power, ex- 
empt from any higher law, restrained by no moral 
precepts. But egoism, free and unrestrained, does 
not tend to establish economic equality. Men are 
driven by their egoistic tendencies to outdo others, 
to gain advantages over them, to acquire pre-emi- 
nence, to obtain more abundant means for the 
gratification of their desires. Human individuals 
being naturally unequal in their gifts and abilities, 
thr^e who are better endowed will succeed in at- 



Conclusion 



3^9 



taining greater power, wider influence, more 
means, and larger possessions. Thus situated, they 
will singly or conjointly overcome the weaker and 
reduce them to dependence. Should society oppose 
their interests, they will revolutionize it and recon- 
struct it according to their ideas. What power 
could impede their success, when nature itself has 
made men unequal in their endowments; or what 
objection could be raised against their right of sub- 
jecting others, when there is no law and no higher 
power to restrain them? Loria starts from the 
same suppositions as the liberal economists, from 
the unrestricted freedom and equality of men in 
their economic relations, and from egoism as the 
only motive of human action. But hence arises 
free competition, and from this results inequality 
in possessions and political power, riches on the 
one side and poverty on the other, a ruling class 
consisting chiefly of the propertied, and a ruled 
class made up mostly of the propertiless. This 
is the very order of things that once existed in 
Greece and Rome, the very condition of modern 
society, which socialists hate and denounce, the 
very inequality which they condemn and combat.* 
Loria's proposal, therefore, must of necessity 
end in failure. The reconstruction of the moral 
and social order advocated by him rests essentially 
on the equal economic conditions of men as the 

*See J. G. Brooks, The Social Unrest, New York 1903. 
pp. 222-243. 



37o 



Conclusion 



means necessary and sufficient to regulate human 
conduct. But such equality can never be realized 
in the double supposition that men are essentially 
egoistic so as to act only from egoistic motives, and 
are at the same time, while altogether unequal in 
their natural endowments, left free and unre- 
strained in their egoistic pursuits. Either a pre- 
existing higher law must effectively control egoism 
and thus establish a moral order, or equality in the 
economic conditions will never come into existence. 

Will the attempt of the more sanguine socialists 
be more successful? They suppose, as was said 
above, that the economic environment to exist in 
future society will thoroughly change egoistic human 
nature, by developing in it social instincts and sym- 
pathies, disinterestedness and zeal for the common 
weal, horror of wrong and love of justice. Such 
a happy change being brought about, men will 
spontaneously be good and moral, just and right- 
eous, without the behest of any authority, without 
hope or fear of any retribution, merely by an im- 
pulse from within. Above in Part I, Chapter V, 
we quoted a good many socialist authorities, from 
Karl Marx down to the most recent writers, who 
set forth at full length how under communism hu- 
man nature, freed from the perversity which was 
generated in it by capitalistic ages, shall be awak- 
ened to the noblest moral aspirations. If E. Unter- 
mann is correct, we might have quoted many more 
authorities. For he says : 



Conclusion 



371 



"Change conditions, and you change human na- 
ture. That is the refrain through all the works of 
proletarian thinkers of modern times."* 

The hopes of these philosophers are very san- 
guine, but they fail like those of Loria as soon as 
their arguments are sifted. First of all, is a change 
of nature to be expected as probable? Certainly 
not if we consult history. Through all past ages 
the human heart has remained the same. If we 
go back in history as far as the Babylonian and 
Assyrian antiquities recently unearthed, to the 
Egyptian inscriptions and papyri found in the pyra- 
mids, to the books of Moses and the poems of 
Homer, man in all these monuments appears with 
the same passions and inclinations, the same tenden- 
cies, the same emotions, and the same weakness 
of will which we observe in him this very day. 
He was then, as he is to-day, prone to anger, re- 
venge, avarice, lust, anxious to domineer, naturally 
impatient of submission and oppression, unwilling 
to undergo labor and hardships unless allured by 
the hope of gain and success, mostly self-seeking, 
seldom generous and disinterested. His mind, 
though taking delight in the knowledge of truth 
and bent on inquiry, was and is still easily warped 
by prejudice and passion and therefore apt to em- 
brace the most fatal errors. His will was, as it is 
now, longing for happiness in the supreme good, 
and loved right and justice, but owing to the pres- 

*The World's Revolutions, p. 162. 



372 



Conclusion 



sure of sensual impulses, was prone to vice and in- 
ordinate gratifications. Only the highest spiritual 
ideals and supernatural institutions as found in 
Christianity, have exercised an influence powerful 
enough to redeem men from their natural weakness, 
and to elevate them above their congenital inclina- 
tions, to a higher plane of morality; an influence, 
however, to which the majority of mankind has re- 
fused to yield or even to be subject. Nay, accord- 
ing to socialist teaching, the human character has 
in the course of history not only not improved, but 
has become ever worse, ever more egoistic, ever 
meaner, and ever more corrupt. 

If during such length of ages, from the dawn of 
historical times down to our day, under various cir- 
cumstances, under manifold material, political, cul- 
tural, and religious conditions, human nature has 
remained unchanged and preserved the same in- 
nate passions and propensities, will it be thor- 
oughly transformed all over the earth in the near 
future, not by any ideal, spiritual, or supernatural 
influence, but merely by the introduction of new 
economic conditions ? The experience made through 
all ages does not justify such an assumption. What 
reason, then, can socialist philosophers advance for 
it? Nothing but the universality of evolution. 

Because gradual development and transforma- 
tion of species are found in the vegetable and ani- 
mal kingdom, they infer that evolution must be 
universal and hence comprise also the human race. 



Conclusion 



373 



But by so reasoning they plainly commit them- 
selves to a self-contradiction. For they promise to 
establish evolutionism as a universal theory merely 
by experience and by no a priori principles. But 
now they are to prove its applicability to mankind 
not from experience, but admit it against experi- 
ence. Nay, more, they evidently move in a vicious 
circle. For they prove the transformation of hu- 
man nature from the universality of evolution, and 
vice versa can not maintain evolution to be uni- 
versal, before they have evinced the evolution of 
the human race as an undeniable fact, and have 
evinced it from experience alone. 

But to come still nearer to the point, evolution 
as conceived by socialist philosophers will never 
succeed in transforming and ennobling the nature 
and character of man to such a degree, that charity 
and justice will be generally exercised in society 
without the control of law and religion, merely by 
the impulse of social instincts. 

Let us consider the moral condition of society at 
the time, when, according to socialist predictions, 
the proletariat will have seized the supreme polit- 
ical power and made the first attempts at socializing 
the means of production. What an amount of cor- 
ruption will just then exist and demand reforma- 
tion? The capitalists will have reached the climax 
of depravity. Their cold and heartless egoism, 
their greed and craving for oppression and unjust 
exploitation, their degrading voluptuousness will 



374 



Conclusion 



have grown to an unparalleled degree. This state- 
ment will be denied by no socialist. The middle 
classes and independent farmers, if there be any 
left, will undoubtedly live in very abnormal condi- 
tions, entailing on them much misery and hence 
preventing their moral development. The working- 
men and their families must be stunted by their 
long-protracted wretchedness, ill-bred on account 
of the oppression through all the capitalistic ages, 
embittered and inclined to violence owing to the 
class struggle to which they were accustomed in the 
immediately preceding epoch. 

Best disposed of all should be the socialists, for 
they are already educated by their leaders through 
the press and numerous addresses. But to judge 
from their conduct, it would seem that this care- 
ful training is of little avail. Not to speak of the 
immoderate hatred they bear to the possessing 
classes and in general to all that show themselves 
opposed to their aims, there is a lack of harmony 
and fraternal feeling among their own ranks. The 
whole world is witness to the rudeness shown and 
the oral outrages committed in the Congress at 
Dresden in 1903 and even of late in the Interna- 
tional Congress at Stuttgart. What bitter strifes 
among the different parties and divisions in France 
and Italy, does not the socialist press itself con- 
tinually report ? Again how intense is not the hos- 
tility that at present divides the Socialist Party of 
America and the Socialist Labor Party? What 



Conclusion 



375 



scenes of discord were enacted in New York* and 
later on in Chicago and Indianapolis, when the So- 
cialist Party was formed ! That even of late, fac- 
tions, egoistic and unsocial sentiments, exist among 
American socialists no less than among the capital- 
ists, we must infer from admonitions administered 
to them by Herron in the International Socialist 
Review, April, 1904. He says in part: 

"It is high time that the Socialist movement shall 
pass beyond the factional or personal stage of its 
growth." 

*In a meeting of July 8, 1899, a pitched battle took place, of 
which Frederick Heath, a socialist himself, in his "Brief His- 
tory of Socialism in America" (p. 72) gives the following 
description : 

"The meeting had scarcely begun before the two factions 
came to blows. The following from the account of one of the 
eye-witnesses will give some idea of the scene that followed. 
'This act of violence on the part of Keep was the signal for 
an outburst of passion seldom witnessed in any political meet- 
ing, much less in a meeting of Socialists. The delegates 
pummeled each other until blood was soon flowing from 
many wounds. Men were sprawling upon the floor, others 
were fighting in the corners, upon the tables, chairs and upon 
the piano, Hugo Vogt having climbed upon the latter, yelling 
and fairly foaming from the mouth/ etc. Finally the DeLeon 
contingent withdrew. 

"On Monday July 10, another fight took place. The 'Volks- 
zeitung' faction had held a meeting, deposed the National 
Committee and elected one in its stead. A committee was 
sent to the officers of the 'People' to demand the party prop- 
erty. They attempted to force their way in and were repulsed 
by DeLeon and others, who were in possession, with clubs, 
bottles and other weapons. The police were called in and 
obliged the intruders to retire." 



37^ 



Conclusion 



"The closer we examine the causes of most of 
our factional troubles, the more we will find them 
to be personal self-seeking, masquerading as prin- 
ciple. Men unconsciously seize upon some frag- 
ment of a truth or principle and make it a platform 
upon which to exalt themselves. Personal ambition 
is essential treason anyhow, and the self-seeker will 
always unconsciously or consciously lead or direct 
a movement or faction in the interest of his self- 
seeking. And it is time we understood this self- 
seeking origin and nature of nearly all our fac- 
tional troubles, and that we outgrow them by rela- 
ting ourselves to the larger outlook and opportunity 
of the Socialist movement. It is time that we put 
away these childish things, in order to seize upon 
greater things that are unused in our hands." 

"Our factions are a part of our capitalist in- 
heritance. They are survivals of the animal mind 
of capitalism. They are the persistence of the com- 
petitive spirit that has produced the capitalist mon- 
ster. 

"For capitalism is but the survival of the animal 
in man; the survival of the predatory world in the 
jungle. Our present industrial world is due to the 
fact that we have not yet become human; that we 
are still beasts of prey fighting with each other for 
our bread. Those of us who possess are but the 
lion, or the tiger, or the wolf, with paw upon their 
prey. We are still cannibals, by economic indirec- 
tion, still peeping from the forest of our primal 



Conclusion 



377 



experience, still waiting to be evolved into the hu- 
man."* 

The bitter dissensions existing at this very 
moment among American socialists about politi- 
cal organizations and industrial unionism are 
ample proof that Herron's warning is to the 
point.f 

The beast of prey and the cannibal, of whom he 
speaks, will undoubtedly remain in the socialists 
up to the day on which they shall gain posses- 
sion of the public power. For the advent of 
the commonwealth is, as we hear it said, near at 
hand, and within so short a time a thorough 
change of their nature is not possible. Moreover, 
moral development is said to depend on the eco- 
nomic conditions and the social environment in 
which men live. But up to the actual establishment 
of the future society there will be the old economic 
relations and the old social surroundings, which, as 
socialist philosophers maintain, have thus far bru- 
talized the human character. Furthermore, the un- 
relenting war which socialists carry on against capi- 
talism, the hatred they nourish in their hearts and 
inflame in others, the fights and strifes they con- 
tinually rouse and foster, sometimes even by vio- 
lent methods, are certainly more suited to inflame 
their passions and to intensify their inherited fierce- 

*Int. Soc. Rev. April 1904. pp. 581. 582. 
fSee Untermann's article in the Int. Soc. Rev. March 1908. 
PP. 538-547- 



378 



Conclusion 



ness than to soften their hearts and fill them with 
tender sympathies. 

Now in what manner shall this universal corrup- 
tion of morals, which has become a second nature 
of the capitalist class, this inveterate egoism, these 
remnants of brutality, which are still the inher- 
itance of the working classes and even of the social- 
ists, be remedied and uprooted in the human heart, 
when the happy times of the co-operative common- 
wealth shall have dawned? It would certainly be 
most unreasonable to maintain that the mere seizure 
of the governmental power by the proletariat, or 
the proclamation of the communistic republic will 
heal human hearts and regenerate them to 
righteousness as the sun in spring melts the icy 
surface of the earth and awakens nature to new 
life. This would be the most astounding phenome- 
non ever seen, contrary to all laws thus far known. 
The socialists themselves, with whom we deal, do 
not entertain such an idea, nor could they consis- 
tently with their evolutionary materialism. The 
change of human character will, in their opinion, 
be brought about by evolution under the influence 
of better economic conditions and social environ- 
ment prevailing in the new commonwealth, and in 
accordance with the universal laws of the great 
world-process. 

But is such evolutionary transformation of man's 
nature possible, or probable, and how shall it take 
place? Evolution, in general, may change species 



Conclusion 



379 



in two ways, which are described by Hugo de Vries 
in the following paragraphs. 

"On this point Darwin has recognized two 
possibilities. One means of change lies in the 
sudden and spontaneous production of new forms 
from the old stock. The other method is the 
gradual accumulation of those always present 
and ever fluctuating variations which are indi- 
cated by the common assertion that no two indi- 
viduals of a given race are exactly alike. The 
first changes are what we call 'mutations'; the 
second are designated as 'individual variations' or 
as the term is often used in another sense as 
'fluctuations.' " 

"The actual occurrence of mutations is now rec- 
ognized, and the battle rages about the question 
as to whether they are to be regarded as the prin- 
cipal means of evolution, or, whether slow and 
gradual changes have also played a large and im- 
portant part. 

"Mutations under observation are as yet very 
rare; enough to indicate the possible and most prob- 
able ways, but no more. On the other hand the 
accumulation of fluctuations does not transgress 
relatively narrow limits as far as the present meth- 
ods of observation go."* 

"The principle of natural selection is the sifting 
out of all organisms of minor worth through the 

*Species and Varieties. By Hugo de Vries. Chicago 1906. 
pp. 7, 8. 



3 8o 



Conclusion 



struggle of life. It is only a sieve, and not a force 
of nature, not a direct cause of improvement, as 
many of Darwin's adversaries, and unfortunately 
many of his followers also, have so often asserted. 
It is only a sieve which decides what is to live and 
what is to die." 

"Natural selection may explain the survival of 
the fittest, but it cannot explain the arrival of the 
fittest."* 

From these explanations we must infer that 
neither the theory of mutations nor that of 
fluctuations or variations has thus far been gen- 
erally verified by experience; and least of all are 
they verified as far as human evolution is con- 
cerned. Accumulation of varieties is nowadays re- 
garded by the majority of scientists as insufficient 
to explain the origin of species. Mutation has been 
observed only in few species of plants and animals, 
and has in most cases been obtained only by arti- 
ficial experiments. The species thus produced, in 
order to become permanent, must usually be se- 
cluded from others, as otherwise they disappear by 
intercourse with them. Universal evolution, and 
human evolution in particular, is, therefore, by no 
means as yet an established fact or a certain theory, 
so that socialists may recur to it as an incontestable 

*Species and Varieties. By Hugo de Vries. Chicago 1906. 
pp. 6, 825. A. M. Simons prefers De Vries' theory of mutation 
( Int. Soc. Rev. Sept. 1905. p. 172). Raphael Buck recommends 
Darwin's theory of fluctuations (Ibid. May 1902. p. 782). 



Conclusion 



381 



proof for the transformation of human nature in 
final society. 

But let us for the sake of argument make abstrac- 
tion from the want of evidence furnished by experi- 
ence, and inquire only what conclusions may be 
drawn from evolution in favor of socialism. This 
much is certain, that according to the hypothesis of 
mutation as well as of fluctuations the change of 
nature and character in the human race can not be 
but very slow. By accumulated fluctuations, as 
Darwinists generally grant, species are transformed 
only within periods of thousands and even millions 
of years. Mutation will scarcely be less slow, if 
there is question of the transformation of nature not 
only in some individuals but in the whole human 
race. For though it produces new species at once, 
it leaves the old stock, from which the new forms 
sprang, unchanged. Hence it happens that im- 
proved and not improved species will live together. 
But by such a mixture improvements obtained are 
easily lost again. Selection also extinguishes the 
lower species very slowly in the struggle for exist- 
ence or rather, as far as present experience proves, 
it extinguishes only some and allows thousands and 
thousands of them to continue their existence. 

It will, consequently, be necessary to admit a 
period of transition between the moment that the 
proletariat seizes the public power and the time 
that the nature and moral character of the human 
race will be completely transformed; and this 



382 



Conclusion 



period can not possibly be short, but must neces- 
sarily be of a long, nay indefinite duration. But if 
this be so, the question presents itself, of what kind 
will the social and economic conditions be which 
during this transition period are to prevail and to 
exercise an influence on human character? 

Economic equality can not at that time be intro- 
duced. Many socialists admit that in the beginning 
of the commonwealth the farmers will not be ex- 
propriated, and smaller industries will not be sup- 
pressed. Distribution also will be unequal, because 
it will be made in proportion to work performed. 
This is expressly granted by Marx. 

"Each producer (laborer) will receive — after 
deduction has been made for the needs of society — 
exactly what he has contributed. His contribution 
is his individual share of labor." . . . "The so- 
ciety will give him a certificate that he has fur- 
nished a certain quantity of work . . . and 
showing his certificate he will draw from the so- 
ciety's stores an amount of provisions equivalent in 
value to his work. The amount of work given to 
the society in one shape is again received in an- 
other." 

Hence Marx concludes: 

"In substance as well as in their nature rights 
will be unequal, . . . but these inconveniences are 
unavoidable during this first period of communist 
society which, after long travailing, is just then is- 
suing from the womb of capitalist society. Right 



Conclusion 



383 



can never be superior to economic conditions and 
to the development of civilization determined by 
them." 

Only in a later and more perfect society will each 
one receive according to his needs. 

"In a higher phase of communist society, after 
slavish subordination of the individual under the 
divisions of labor, and consequently the opposition 
between mental and bodily work has disappeared; 
after labor has ceased to be merely the means of 
sustaining life, but has become an urgent desire; 
after the individual has become more perfect in 
every respect, increasing thereby also the produc- 
tive forces and giving full play to the fountains of 
co-operative wealth — then only the narrow ordi- 
nary barriers of right and justice can be demol- 
ished, and society may inscribe upon its banner: 
Each one according to his abilities, to each one ac- 
cording to his needs."* 

During the transition period there will also exist 
a government. For egoistic and discordant as men 
will still be, they can co-exist and co-operate for 
the common good only under the direction of au- 
thority exercising effectual coercion. But this gov- 
ernment, as was stated above, will be conducted 
by the victorious proletariat, which, after over- 

*Quoted by Cathrein. Socialism, pp. 55, 56. From Capital, 
vol. i. pp. 566, 567. The same passage in substance is found 
also in Marx's criticism of the program submitted to the 
Gotha Congress of 1875. See Int. Soc. Rev. May 1908. 
pp. 648, 649. 



3§4 



Conclusion 



throwing capitalistic society by a violent revolu- 
tion, will confiscate the large possessions of the rul- 
ing class and forcibly prevent the "expropriated ex- 
proprietors" from recovering their former wealth, 
or, as Marx says in the communist manifesto, make 
despotic inroads on the rights of property. 

And what kind of social relations will exist 
among the members of the proletarian State? The 
expropriated, undoubtedly, will submit to the vic- 
torious majority only reluctantly, only with the 
most embittered feelings, remaining always bent on 
resistance. Those who are not imbued with social- 
ist principles will detest the new government and 
long for its abolition. The proletarians themselves 
will be anxious to take revenge on their former op- 
pressors and exercise their power with harshness, 
rigor, or even cruelty. Still egoistic, addicted to 
self-interest and accustomed to contention, as they 
are, they will not agree among themselves, any 
more than they do at present, so long as they do not 
submit to a higher power that could unite, or to a 
law that could restrain them. 

There will, consequently, be no harmony and 
unity in government. Besides government will be 
merely coercive. Having no authority to lay the 
members of the State under moral obligation, or 
enact laws binding in conscience, its power consists 
merely in the arbitrary and absolute will and the 
main force of the proletarian majority, and the 
acts by which it maintains some order will consist 



Conclusion 385 

but in compulsion. But force arbitrarily exercised 
by a selfish majority in its own interest is the worst 
of all tyrannies. Hence must of necessity result dis- 
content with public administration ; discontent with 
the distribution of work as well as with the distri- 
bution of products, not to speak of confiscation and 
expropriation; discontent with the prohibition of 
private production; discontent with the manner in 
which public education is conducted. There will be 
discord not only between those in power, between 
the government and the citizens, but also among 
the individual members of the republic on account 
of clashing interests and difference of opinion; nay 
more, there will be mutual hatred and aversion on 
account of injuries and disadvantages suffered and 
opposition experienced. Passions thus being excited 
and not restrained by a moral law, fights, strifes, 
attacks will inevitably be frequent, if not perpetual 
occurrences. Resistance to government, attempts to 
overthrow it, revolts and civil wars can not but be 
necessary consequences. 

Will human character in such social environ- 
ments be improved? Will egoism disappear, de- 
votedness to the commonweal be fostered? Will 
justice and mutual love blossom? To think so 
would be a plain absurdity. The socialists them- 
selves could not entertain such an idea. Human 
nature, as they teach, will be changed in a later 
period of the commonwealth, when perfect equal- 
ity of rights and opportunities shall be established, 



3 86 



Conclusion 



coercion by government will not be necessary, well- 
organized social labor will produce plenty of 
means of subsistence; frictions, opposition, clash- 
ing of interests, compulsion, and oppression will 
no longer exist, and, instead of strifes which en- 
gender bitterness, universal peace and concord will 
reign. Evidently, then, during the transition period 
human nature will not be changed, and character 
will not be improved. 

But, it is said, this transition period will run out 
into the felicitous conditions of final society as the 
necessary terminus of universal evolution. What 
reasons are there to think so ? To conceive such a 
progress to a higher stage of evolution as possible, 
it would be necessary that the co-operative com- 
monwealth with its peace and plenty be precon- 
tained in the conditions of the transition period as 
in its cause. This is granted also by socialists. 
Marx and others after him tell us in clear terms, 
that every new form of society must be prepared 
in the bosom of the preceding one from which it is 
developed. But in the social disorder which of 
necessity will reign in the transition period, the per- 
fect peace and order of the co-operative common- 
wealth is certainly not preformed or predeter- 
mined. According to all historical experience and 
in accordance with all principles of reason, we must 
expect that the heat of unbridled passions, uni- 
versal discord, unabated egoism, general dissatis- 
faction, the absence of laws binding in conscience 



Conclusion 



337 



and of the influence exercised by religion, the harsh- 
ness and arbitrariness of government, conducted 
by the victorious proletariat with unrestricted 
power and the use of main force, will result in the 
violent dissolution of society. No, the seizure of 
the public power by the proletariat, the establish- 
ment of a proletarian government, the confiscation 
of private property, the introduction of collective 
ownership and socialized production and distribu- 
tion, will not end in an ideal democratic common- 
wealth, in a peaceful and happy social life, but in 
wretched disorder, in a most gloomy chaos. 

On the ground of the preceding considerations 
we must characterize as false and absurd the as- 
sumption itself, that the perfect social and eco- 
nomic conditions which are supposed to prevail in 
future society will improve and regenerate cor- 
rupted human nature. These much praised normal 
economic conditions, these happy and peaceful so- 
cial surroundings, will come into existence and be 
maintained for any length of time only when men 
shall have outgrown their evil habits and inveterate 
egoism, when they shall have been accustomed to 
sacrifice personal to public interests, when discord 
and jealousy shall have died out, when all shall 
have learned to take delight in labors of whatever 
kind for the common welfare and to restrict the 
satisfaction of their needs and the gratification of 
their inclinations as far as the well-being of their 
fellow-men requires; in a word, v/hen the moral 



3 88 



Conclusion 



character of the members of the community shall 
have reached a very high degree of excellence. 
The assertion, therefore, that human nature as 
to its moral tendencies will be regenerated by the 
economic and social environment which is to exist 
in a later and more perfect period of the co- 
operative commonwealth, is a vicious circle. For 
what is a necessary prerequisite, a cause of the 
perfect and normal environment, is asserted to be 
its effect. Moral integrity, in a high degree, is the 
very basis on which the commonwealth must be 
built up, if it is to exist lastingly and to ensure 
plenty, peace, and happiness. And this very in- 
tegrity and perfection, so sorely wanting not 
only during all capitalistic ages but also in the 
period of transition, is maintained to be the out- 
come and the result of the happy conditions to 
exist in the co-operative commonwealth, the final 
society. 

The hope, then, that human nature will be 
changed and morally regenerated when the last 
stage of evolution will have arrived in socialist so- 
ciety, is vain, because based on imagination, on a 
mere sophism, on an absurd assumption. But this 
being so, the foundations of the social and moral 
order ultimately had recourse to by socialist philoso- 
phers have vanished. The destruction of morality 
and of society, domestic and civil, wrought by them 
is complete; so complete that absolutely no basis 
for them remains, so thorough, that there are only 



Conclusion 



389 



ruins left, on which it is impossible to build up a 
new structure. 

The ultimate outcome of socialism, then, is anni- 
hilation of morality as well as of religion, of the 
social order as well as of right individual conduct, 
in the same way as it is denial of the world beyond 
the everchanging phenomena, of the supersensible 
and eternal, of the spiritual and immortal soul, of 
God, the infinite Spirit, the Creator, and Supreme 
Good. Socialism is by its very nature destruction 
and negation. Such is the conclusion in which all 
our particular deductions are focussed. 

This outcome is the condemnation of socialism 
both as an economic social movement and as a 
philosophical system, a condemnation than which 
no other could be clearer and more peremptory. 
As an economic movement it aims at radically heal- 
ing the evils which modern capitalism has brought 
on society: the division of its members into two 
hostile classes, the accumulation of wealth in the 
hands of the one, and misery oppressing the other, 
the unjust methods employed by the owners of the 
means of production, and the exploitation suffered 
by the laborers. Undoubtedly capitalism, in its 
modern form, because a source of untold evils, de- 
serves condemnation in many respects. But social- 
ism, notwithstanding its pretensions and splendid 
promises, has no remedy for them. It may break 
down the capitalistic State, but can not substitute 
for it another peaceful and well-ordered society; 



390 



Conclusion 



it may confiscate the wealth accumulated by trusts 
and gigantic productive or commercial associa- 
tions, but it can not maintain in existence for any 
length of time nationalized production and distri- 
bution of the goods produced under a proletariat 
administration. Capitalism, since it embraced re- 
ligious unbelief and atheism, has succeeded in its en- 
terprises by trampling under foot and ignoring the 
laws of justice and morality. Socialism goes still 
farther in this direction by overthrowing the basis 
of morality, by persecuting religion and Christian- 
ity, by substituting for divine law proletarian co- 
ercion or mere animal instincts. If capitalism en- 
tails evils on the modern State, socialism, instead 
of remedying them, shatters society to its very 
foundations. 

As a philosophical system socialism is evolution- 
ary materialism, which nowadays is considered su- 
preme wisdom, disrespect for which is a stigma, a 
stamp of ignorance. The greatest philosophical 
minds we meet in the course of history, have con- 
demned materialism, and have shown its falsity by 
unanswerable arguments. But they are ignored by 
socialists; their treatises, to all appearance, are not 
studied by them, but disdained with supercilious 
contempt. It would, therefore, be useless to enter, 
in conclusion, on a philosophical refutation of ma- 
terialism. Nor is further disproof necessary. 

Evolutionary materialism, as a philosophical 
system embodied in socialism, stands condemned as 



Conclusion 



391 



false and absurd by the Nihilism in which it results. 
By its conclusions it denies the Ultimate Cause, in- 
dependently of which this finite universe can not ex- 
ist, the Supreme Wisdom, to which must be re- 
traced the order and beauty of the world. It denies 
the Supreme Truth in which alone the human mind 
can find rest, and the Supreme Good for which the 
will longs; it denies the eternal, necessary principles 
without which reason can not operate, and the 
eternal laws by which the will, not to leave the 
path of right and virtue, must be directed and re- 
strained; it denies the existence of the human in- 
tellect itself, of whose operations we are conscious 
and whose achievements fill everybody with won- 
der, and the freedom of the will, without which the 
wisest laws and institutions are absurdities. Fur- 
thermore, it strips man of all the gifts and pre- 
rogatives distinct in kind from the endowments of 
the brute, though his rule and pre-eminence over 
irrational creation is beyond all doubt; it silences 
conscience manifesting to man a divine law, 
though its voice is heard most distinctly; it abol- 
ishes the moral precepts, which demand the sub- 
jection of passions to reason and justice in dealing 
with others, though without their observance 
neither individual nor social life can subsist. 
Finally it undermines authority, does away with 
natural rights and duties, replaces moral obliga- 
tion by physical coercion, the dictates of reason 
by animal instincts, though a society of free ra- 



392 



Conclusion 



tional beings, a human society distinct from the 
aggregation of animals, is thus made impossible. 
All these denials and destructions are contrary to 
man's rational nature, contrary to his firmest and 
most certain convictions, contrary to his rank and 
position in the universe, contrary to the right order 
which reason prescribes for social and individual 
life, and in the observance of which alone man can 
find his supreme good and happiness. They are, 
consequently, theoretically and practically absurd 
and contradictory; they are the annihilation of all 
that is human and rational as well as of what is 
ideal, spiritual, and divine. 

In truth, socialism stands condemned by the 
Nihilism which is its ultimate outcome. 



INDEX 



A 

Abbot, L., 212, 223, 224, 229. 
Actions, regarding self, 117. 
Acts, human, 30. 
Adultery, 175, 176, 180. 
"Advance," the, 235. 
American Constitution, 294. 
Anti-militarism, 315, 317-326; 
in Army and Navy, 321- 
324; 

in the United States, 324, 
325. 

"Appeal to Reason," 155. 
Asceticism, 43, 127-130. 
Atheism, 19, 391. 
Authority, necessary for so- 
ciety, 147, 148; 
civil, 260, 261. 

B 

Barbarism, 161, 274, 275. 

Bax, E. B., 39, 67, 69, 97, 118, 
122, 127-130, 183, 184, 198, 
210, 211, 252, 303-307, 313, 
347, 348. 

Bebel, A., 22, 75, 119, 125, 126, 
155, 157, 160, 166, 178-183, 
204-207, 241, 244, 247-250, 
256, 257, 284, 285, 330-334, 
337, 338, 346. 

Blatchford, R., 98. 

Brown, W. T., 230-232, 235, 
240. 

Brutes, morality of, 34. 
Burrowes, P. E., 74, 81. 



C 

Capitalism, 

the cancer of society, 99; 

a source of evils, 389; 

not immoral, 65, 66. 
Captives, 24. 
Carpenter, E., 211-213. 
Carr, E. E., Rev., 236. 
Champney, Adeline, 189. 
Chiefs, 264, 268, 269. 
Children, property of the 
community, 210, 243, 244, 
246. 
Christianity, 

early 42-44, 56; 

of the Middle Ages, 44, 45, 
56; 

of bourgeois society, 47; 
influence on morals, 47, 
5I-53- 

"Christian Socialist," the 

(Chicago), 325. 
Church, Catholic, hostility to, 

358. _ 

Civilization, 216, 292, 293. 
Clark, W. A., 170. 
Classes, 
Antagonism of, 281, 282, 

284, 292, 293. 
Code, moral, socialistic, 22, 

26, 28, 49, 61-63, 93-95- 
Coeducation, 249, 251. 
Coercion, power of, 271, 272, 

280. 

Communism, 39, 162, 264, 265. 



394 



Index 



Communist manifesto, 178, 
198, 298, 310, 312, 334, 
344, 345. 
"Comrade," the, 155. 
Congress, 

International, of W.A., 
143, 345, 346; 

of Nancy, 320; 

of Stuttgart, 316-318, 320, 
325, 326. 
Conscience, 97. 
Co-operative Commonwealth, 

general features, 328; 

democratic, 329 ; 

duty for all to work, 330; 

abundance of means, 33 ; 

organized labor, 330, 331 ; 

production for consump- 
tion, 331; 

cultivation of sciences and 
arts, 332 ; 

no government and laws, 
332, 334, 335,* 

no coercive power, 333; 

no crimes, 334; 

no classes, 334; 

a state, 336; 

return to primitive society, 

336-339 ; 

birth of, by violence and 
revolution, 340-349. 
Corbin, C, 218. 
Councils, 265, 268. 
Crime, 98, 99. 
Curiae, 270. 

D 

Darwinism. 59, 60, 69, 379. 
Debs, E., 219. 
Debts, public, 281. 



Deville, G., 69, 253, 288-291, 
299, 34i. 

Dietzgen, J., 27, 67, 76, 77, 85, 
94, 116, 346. 

Distribution of goods pro- 
duced, 382, 383. 

Divorce, 181, 210. 

Duties to others, 136, 137. 

E 

Earle, F. P., 222-224. 
Education, 
transferred to the com- 
munity, 223, 243, 244; 
irreligious, 252-254; 
socialistic plan of, 247-253; 
Egoism, a consequence of 
economic conditions, 104, 
367. (See Morality, indi- 
vidualistic.) 
Elderidge, M. E., 323, 324. 
End, ultimate of man, 
God, 16; 

social welfare, 36, 68-74; 
(See Morality, utilita- 
rian) 

personal welfare. (See 
Morality, individualistic.) 

Engels, F., 124, 157-160, 161, 
162-165, 174, 175-178, 
199, 201-204, 216, 243, 
255, 263-274, 275, 283, 
296, 298, 309, 310, 337- 
"The Origin of the Family, 
Private Property and the 
State," 154, 155. 

Epicureans, 41, 55. 

Erfurt program, 207, 250, 
310. 



Index 



395 



Ethical Schools, 
Greek, 55, Christian, 57, 
bourgeois, 57, English, 
58, French, 58, Kantian, 

59- 
Ethics, 

subject-matter of, 23. 

changeable, 116, 117. 
Evolution, 372, 378-381. 
Expropriation, 345, 347. 

F 

Family, 

definition, 152 ; 

component parts, 152 ; 

an institution of nature, 

146, 153; 
different forms, 157, prim- 
itive or group family, 
158, consanguine, 158, 
Punaluan, 159, 166, pair- 
ing, 161, monogamous, 
174, 175; 
abolition of, 197-200, 258. 
Franklin, C. K., 87. 
Ferri, E., 98, 99, 106, 339. 
Freedom, 
religious, 252, 253; 
of the will, 30-34. 
Free Love, 201, 202, 205, 206, 
209, 227. 

G 

Gens, 159, 263, 264. 268, 269. 

Gentile Constitution, 

among the Iroquois In- 
dians, 264-267, the 
Greeks, 267-269, the Ro- 
mans, 269-271, the Ger- 
mans, 271 ; 



Gentile Constitution {Cont'd) 

abolished, 271-275. 
Germans, 176, 271, 273-275. 
Giddings, Prof., 221, 225. 
God, 16. 

Goldstein, D., 235. 
Good, the morally, 

according to theistic con- 
ception, 21 ; 
according to socialist phil- 
osophy : 
defined, 26, 36, 61, 80; 
changeable and relative, 
21-28; 

as conceived by the ancient 
Germans, 61, in ancient 
Rome, 61, 62, in feudal 
England, 62, in the Uni- 
ted States, 62, 63. 

Greeks, 125, 126, 267-269. 

Gorky, M., 219-222. 

Grinnell University, 225 ; 
Congregational Church, 226. 

Gumplowicz, L., 209, 239. 

H 

Happiness, only temporal and 

earthly, 76-78. 
Heath, F., 375. 
Herron, G. D., 22, 23, 75, 106, 

187, 292-294, 375-377 ; 
Free-love marriage of, 224- 

236, 240. 
Hetaerism, 175. 
Hillquit, Morris, 37, 91, 92, 

116, 117, 291, 292, 336, 

34i. 

Household, private, 255. 
Hyndman, H. M., 197. 



396 



Index 



I 

Ideals, influence of, 63, 64. 
Impulse, sexual, 91, 126. 
satisfaction of, 126, 129, 
179. 

Individualism, see Morality. 

Individuals, absolutely de- 
pendent on society, 139, 
140. 

Interest, 

social, identical with that 

of labor, 78, 79; 
social and personal re- 
conciled, 74-76. 

International Socialist Bu- 
reau, 313, 318-320. 

''International Socialist Re- 
view," the, 155. 

Instinct, social, 88. 

J 

Justice, 
a merely human institution, 

141, 142; 
to disappear, 142 ; 
in the co-operative com- 
monwealth, 347, 348. 

K 

Kaeser, Dr. E. 3 348. 
Kant, 59. 

Kautsky, K., 27, 28, 30-34, 
55-60, 83-97, 103-106, 135- 
137, 140, 141, 186, 187, 
207, 208, 213. 252. 

Kerr. Chas. H.. 61-63. 72, 80. 
107. 121, 155, 343. 

King, Murray E., 109. 

Kuttner, Miss, 222-224. 



L 

Labor, first organized, 168. 

exploited. 292, 293. 
Labriola, A., 97, 287, 288. 
Ladoff, I., 36, 37, 70, 72, 77, 

116. 

Lafargue, P., 141-143, 168. 

La Monte, Robert Rives, 26, 
81, 82. 113, 138, 139, 236, 
299, 363. 

Land ownership, 272, 274, 285. 

Law, moral, 

according to theistic con- 
ception, 12, 17; 
according to socialist 
philosophy : 

not divine or human, 83- 
85, but physical. 85-87; 
identical with the social 

instinct, 89, 90 ; 
animal, not intellectual, 

90, changeable, 91-93 ; 
without obligation, 96 ; 
general formula, 94, 
Law (or right), 
maternal, 159, 166. 169, 
171; 

abolition of, 164; 

paternal, 165, 172, 269. 
Lee, Algernon, 325, 326. 
Liebknecht, W., 329. 
Lewis. Austin, 139. 
Life, individual, 

according to Christian 
ethics, 115; 

according to socialist 
ethics : 

outside of the province of 
morality, 116, 117; 



Index 



397 



Life, individual {Cont'd) 
must be free from un- 
necessary sacrifice, 120, 
122, asceticism, self- 
discipline, 122, and im- 
pediments to full de- 
velopment, 123. 
normal development of, 
must be natural, (i.e., 
animal), comprise the 
exercise of all faculties 
and the satisfaction of all 
bodily wants, 127, 128; 
higher and intellectual, 
how attained, 128-130. 
Loria, A. A., 37, 48-55, 75, 77, 
101-103, 168-170, 285-287, 
302, 338, 367-369- 
Loyalty to country disclaimed, 
312-315. 

M 

Man, supremacy of, 162, 165, 
169, 170. 

abolished under socialism, 
202. 
Marriage, 

defined, 152; 

Christian, 153, 191-196; 

interfered with in modern 
society, 192, 195; 

upheld by the Church, 193 ; 

different forms : group 
marriage, 158-161 ; mono- 
gamy, in antiquity 174, 
175, modern, 176-190, 
condemned by socialists 
because unnatural, 179, 
based on economic con- 
siderations, 180, 185, 188, 



Marriage {Cont'd) 

210, degrading for 
woman, 180, 184, entail- 
ing unhappiness, 180, 
181, enslaving the wife 
to the husband, 186, 187, 
failing in its purpose, 
181, 182, 189, multiplying 
divorces, 188, rendering 
marriage to many impos- 
sible, 182, attended by 
adultery and prostitution, 
183, implying hypocrisy 
and superstition, 187, 
189, to be abolished, 
197-199. 
Under socialism, 

ideal of, 200; 

bond: free sex love, 201- 
202; 

dissolvable, 203, 206, 210, 

238, 239; 
renders woman independ- 
ent economically, equal 
to man, free in choice 
and intercourse, 202, 
205-208, 210-212; 
ceremony of, 213, 231. 
Free-love marriage actu- 
ally in practice, 
demanded by women, 

214, 215; 
among the proletariat, 

216, 217; 
in the higher classes, — 
Aveling, E., 218. Gor- 
ky, M., 219-222, Earle, 

F. P.. 222-224, Herron, 

G. D., 224-236. 



398 



Index 



Marriage, free-love {Cont'd) 
re-introduces restricted 
promiscuity, 237-242. 
Majority, true and sham, 306, 
307. 

Marx, E., 218. 

Marx, Karl, 154, 341, 382, 383. 
Materialism, 360, 361 ; French, 

58; English, 59. 
Meily, C, 220. 
Merchants, 276. 
Militarism, 3^5-3^7- 
Monarchy, 274. 
Method employed by author, 

355, 356. 
Money, 277. 

Monogamy, see Marriage. 
Morality, 
meaning, 11, 12; necessity, 
12, 14; 

conception, theistic, 16, 
Christian, 19, socialistic, 
34; 

individualistic, 37, 4<>44, 

47, 48, 55-6o, 61-63, 75 ; 
utilitarian, 36, 37, 68-73, 

116, 117; 
standards of, 27, 68, 72, 79, 

80, 82; 
development of, 38, 
wnder barbarism, 39, 40, 48, 
49; in slave society, 40, 
50, in Greek and Roman 
society, 41-44, in feudal 
society, 44, 45, 51, in com- 
mercial and capitalistic 
society, 46, 53-55- 
perfection of, under social- 
ism, 67-76; 



Morality (Cont'd) 
class institution, 26, 61-63; 
sexual, 118, 119; 
shattered, 361, 362. 
Morgan, L., "Ancient So- 
ciety," 154, 156, 264. 
Motive, moral, 101-105. 
Morris, W., 209, 210, 244, 245, 
334- 

N 

National Convention at 
Chicago, 1904, 214, 251. 

Nature, human, change of, 
by economic conditions, 
104-110, 370-373, 385-388. 

"Neue Zeit," 136. 

Nihilism, 391, 392. 

Nobility, 268, 269, 272. 

O 

Obligation, 96, 97. 
Oldberg, Oda, 209. 
Opinion, public, 53, 103, 104. 

P 

Parents, duty of, 153; said 
to be unfit for education, 
244, 245, 247. 

Parental society, 
defined, 152, 242; 
abolished, 244, 245. 

Patterson, Dr. C. B., 230. 

Patriotism, 312-315. 

Phratries, 265, 268, 270. 

Platforms: Indianapolis, 251; 
Chicago (1904), 294, 
308, 309, 310, 314, 315. 

Plato, 55- 

Platonism, 55. 

Plotinus, 55. 



Index 



399 



Potestas patria, 169, 170. 
Precepts, moral, 

origin of, 95; 

may become formal and 
harmful, 96. 

See Code, moral. 
Promiscuity, 158-160, 241. 
Property, 

common, 264, 265 ; 

private, 163, 170, 269, 271, 
285, 286. 
Prostitution, 182, 183. 

R 

Rand, Carrie, Miss, 226-233. 
Revolution, justified, 308-312, 
342. 

Romans, 269-272. 

S 

Sachems, 264. 
Sanction, 18, 100; 

religious, 50-53; 

by coercion, 49; 

by public opinion, 53, 54, 
104; 

abolished, 103. 
"San Francisco Call," the, 

234. 
Savagery, 157. 

Selection, natural, 108, 109, 

378, 379, 381. 
Self-denial, 

denounced, 127; 

necessary, 132-135. 
Senate, Roman, 270. 
Sense, moral, 91, 92. 
Serfs, 274. 



Simons, A. M., 116, 335. 

May Wood, 23, 65, 170, 314. 
Slaves, 24, 25, 269, 272. 
"Social Democrat," Haver- 
hill, 234; 
editor of, 236. 
Social Democratic Federation, 

250, 321, 322. 
Socialism, 

irreligious, 11; 
destructive, 364, 365, 367- 
370, 389-392. 
Socialists, dissensions among, 

374-378. 
Socialist Party, 
of America, 319; 
of France, 320. 
Society, 
defined, 147; 
natural or free, 148; 
formal constituents, 147, 
148; 

impossible according to 
socialist principles, 148- 
152; 

present conditions of, 373- 
378. 

Spargo, 78, 79. 
State, 

defined, 259, 260; 

an institution of nature, 
146, 260; 

according to socialist phi- 
losophy : 

based on economic con- 
ditions, 275, 285, 290, 
291 ; 

origin of, 278, 284, 292; 



400 



Index 



State {Cont'd) 
object and nature, 278, 279, 
281, 284, 286-288, 290, 
292; 

a class rule, 291, 292, 299; 
difference from gentile 

constitution, 280-283. 
a source of evil, 291, and of 

oppression, 293; 
officials of, 281 ; 
abolition of, 296-297. 
Attitude toward: 
contempt for the State, 

301, 302, and for its laws, 

302-305 ; 

opposition to authority 
and government, 305- 
309; 

revolution, 310-312; 
disloyalty to country, 312- 
315; 

anti-militarism, 315, 317- 

326. 
Stern, J., 235. 
Stoics, 42, 55. 
Suffrage, universal, 282. 

T 

Tactics, socialist, 356-360. 
Taxes, 272. 
Titus, H., 343- 



Transition period, 341, 381- 
385. 

Tribes, 264, 268, 270. 
Troelstra, P. J., 300. 
Truthfulness, no duty to 
enemies, 136. 

U 

Untermann, E., 63, 86, 123, 

370, 378. 
Usury, 278. 

Utilitarianism, see Morality. 
W 

Wars, 315-317. 
Wealth, influence of, 282, 
283. 

Wells. H. G., 246. 
Wentworth, M. C, 212, 
232. 

"Western Clarion," the, 303. 
"Wilshire Magazine," 185. 
Woman, 
original supremacy of, 162, 

166, 172, 173; 
downfall and degradation, 

162, 165, 170, 177; 
emancipation, 205, 207, 212. 
"Worker," the New York, 

143, 235, 321, 342. 
Workingmen, 139, 140. 



PRINTED BY BENZIGER BROTHERS, NEW YORK. 



Standard Catholic Books 

PUBLISHED BY 

BENZIGER BROTHERS, 

Cincinnati: NEW YORK: Chicago: 

343 Main St. 36-38 Barclay St. 211-213 Madison St. 



Books marked net are such where ten per cent, must be added for postage. 
Thus a book advertised at net $1 00 will be sent postpaid on receipt of $1.10. 
Books not marked net will be sent postpaid on receipt of advertised price. 



DOCTRINE, INSTRUCTION, DEVOTION. 
ABANDONMENT. Caussade. S.J. 

ADORATION OF BLESSED SACRAMENT. Tesniere. 

ALPHONSUS LIGUORI, WORKS OF, ST. 22 vols. Each, 

ANECDOTES ILLUSTRATING THE CATECHISM. Spirago. 

ANGLICAN ORDINATIONS. Semple. 

ART OF PROFITING BY OUR FAULTS. Tissot. 

BIBLE HISTORY. 

BIBLE HISTORY. EXPLANATION. Nash. 
BIBLE STORIES. Paper, 0.10; cloth, 
BIBLE, THE HOLY. 

BOOK OF THE PROFESSED. Vol. I, II & III. Each, 
BOYS' AND GIRLS' MISSION BOOK. By the Redemptorist Fath 
BREAD OF LIFE, THE. Complete Communion Book. 
CATECHISM EXPLAINED, THE. Spirago-Clarke. 
CATHOLIC BELIEF. Faa di Bruno. Paper, net, 0.15; cloth, 
CATHOLIC CEREMONIES. Durand. Paper, net, 0.15; cloth, 
CATHOLIC GIRLS' GUIDE. Lasance. 

CATHOLIC PRACTICE AT CHURCH AND AT HOME. Klaudi 

Paper, net, 0.20; cloth, 
CATHOLIC TEACHING FOR CHILDREN. Wray. 
CATHOLIC WORSHIP. Brennan, LL.D. Paper, 0.20; cloth, 
CEREMONIAL FOR ALTAR BOYS. Britt, O.S.B. 
CHARACTERISTICS OF TRUE DEVOTION. Grou, S.J. 
CHILD OF MARY. Prayer-Book for Children. 
CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS. Devivier. 
CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, SPIRAGO'S METHOD OF. 
CHRISTIAN EDUCATION. O'Connell. 
CHRISTIAN FATHER. Cramer. Paper, net, 0.13; cloth, 
CHRISTIAN MOTHER. Cramer. Paper, net, 0.13; cloth, 
CHRISTIAN SCHOOL. McFaul. Paper, 
CONFESSION. Paper, 

CONFESSION AND ITS BENEFITS. Girardey. 
CONFIRMATION. Paper. 
COUNSELS OF ST. ANGELA. 

DEFENCE OF THE SEVEN SACRAMENTS, HENRY VIII. 
O'Donovan. 

DEVOTION TO SACRED HEART OF JESUS. Noldin, S.J. 
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS FOR THE SICK-ROOM. Krebs, 

C.SS.R. Cloth, 
DEVOTIONS AND PRAYERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS. 
DEVOTIONS FOR FIRST FRIDAY. Huguet. 
DIGNITY AND DUTIES OF THE PRIEST. Liguori. 
DIVINE GRACE. Wirth. 
DIVINE OFFICE. Liguori. 
EDUCATION OF OUR GIRLS. Shields. 
EPISTLES AND GOSPELS- Large print. 



ne , 





50 




1 


25 


n h 


1 


50 


''net 


1 


50 


net, 





35 


net, 





50 







50 


net, 


1 


60 







'20 




1 


nn 
<HJ 


net 





75 







35 


net. 





i 


ne , 


2 


r,t\ 
OU 


net, 





3 5 


net, 





i ->s; 
00 


net, 


1 


00 


R. 






net, 





40 







40 







SO 


net, 





35 


net, 





75 







60 


net, 


2 


00 


net, 


1 


50 


net, 





60 


net, 





25 


net, 





25 





10 







05 







25 







05 


net, 





25 


net, 


2 


00 


net, 


1 


25 


net, 


1 


25 


net, 


1 


25 


net, 





40 


net, 


1 


50 


net, 


1 


60 


net, 


1 


50 


net, 


1 


00 


net, 





25 



EUCHARISTIC CHRIST. Tesniere. net, 1 25 

EUCHARISTIC SOUL ELEVATIONS. Stadelman. net, 50 

EXPLANATION OF THE BALTIMORE CATECHISM. Kinkead. net, 1 00 
EXPLANATION OF THE GOSPELS. Lambert. Paper, net, 0.15; 
_ cloth, net, 35 

EXPLANATION OF THE HOLY SACRAMENTS. ILLUSTR. net, 1 00 
EXPLANATION OF THE MASS. Cochem. net, 1 25 

EXPLANATION OF THE OUR FATHER AND THE HAIL 

MARY. Brennan, LL.D. net, 75 

EXPLANATION OF THE PRAYERS AND CEREMONIES OF 

THE MASS, ILLUSTRATED. Lanslots, O.S.B. net, 1 25 

EXPLANATION OF THE SALVE REGINA. Liguori. net, 75 

EXTREME UNCTION. Paper, 10 

FIRST COMMUNICANT'S MANUAL. 50 

FLOWERS OF THE PASSION. Th. de Jesus-Agonisant. 50 

FOLLOWING OF CHRIST. Kempis. 

With Reflections, 50 

Without Reflections. 45 

Edition de Luxe, 1 25 

FOUR LAST THINGS, THE. Meditations. Cochem. net, 75 

GARLAND OF PRAYER. With Nuptial Mass. Leather. 90 

GENERAL CONFESSION MADE EASY. Konings, C.SS.R. Flexible. 15 
GENERAL PRINCIPLES OF RELIGIOUS LIFE. Verheyen, O.S.B. net, 30 
GIFT OF THE KING. 60 

GLORIES OF DIVINE GRACE. Scheeben. net, 1 60 

GLORIES OF MARY. Liguori. 2 vols. net, 3 00 

Popular ed. 1 vol. net, 1 25 

GLORIES OF THE SACRED HEART. Hausherr, S.J. net, 1 25 

GOFFINE'S DEVOUT INSTRUCTIONS. 140 Illustrations. Cloth, 1 00 
GOLDEN SANDS. Little Counsels for the Sanctification and Hap- 
piness of Daily Life. Third, Fourth and Fifth Series. Each, net, 50 
GREAT ENCYCLICAL LETTERS OF POPE LEO XIII. net, 2 25 

GREAT MEANS OF SALVATION. Liguori. net, 1 50 

GREAT SUPPER OF GOD. THE. Coube, S.J. net, 1 25 

GREETINGS OF THE CHRIST-CHILD — Poems. 60 

GUIDE FOR SACRISTANS. net, 85 

GUIDE TO CONFESSION AND COMMUNION. net, 50 

HANDBOOK OF THE CHRISTIAN RELIGION. Wilmers, S.J. net, 1 50 
HARMONY OF THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. Heuser. net, 1 25 

HELP FOR THE POOR SOULS IN PURGATORY. net, 50 

HELPS TO A SPIRITUAL LIFE. Schneider, SJ. net, 1 25 

HIDDEN TREASURE. St. Leonard of Port Maurice. net, 50 

HISTORY OF ECONOMICS. Dewe. net, 1 50 

HISTORY OF CATHOLIC EDUCATION IN THE U. S. Burns, net, 1 25 
HISTORY OF THE MASS. O'Brien. net, 1 25 

HOLY EUCHARIST. Ltguort. net, 1 50 

HOLY HOUR OF ADORATION. Stang. net, 50 

HOLY MASS. Liguori. net, 1 50 

HOW TO COMFORT THE SICK. Krebs, C.SS.R. net, 1 25 

HOW TO MAKE THE MISSION. By a Dominican Father. Paper, 10 
ILLUSTRATED PRAYER-BOOK FOR CHILDREN. 35 

IMITATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN MARY. Bennett-Gladstone. 
Plain Edition. net, 50 

Edition de luxe, net, 1 50 

IMITATION OF THE SACRED HEART. Arnoudt, S.J. net, 1 25 

IMMACULATE CONCEPTION, THE. Lambing, LL.D. 35 

INCARNATION, BIRTH, AND INFANCY OF CHRIST. Liguori. net, 1 50 
INDULGENCES. A PRACTICAL GUIDE TO. Bernad, O.M.I. net, 75 
IN HEAVEN WE KNOW OUR OWN. Blot, S.J. net, 60 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CATHOLIC FATHER. Egger. net, 50 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR THE CATHOLIC MOTHER. Egger. net, 50 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR CATHOLIC YOUTH. net, 50 

INSTRUCTIONS FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS. Schmitt. net, 60 
INSTRUCTIONS ON COMMANDMENTS AND SACRAMENTS. 

Liguori. Paper, net, 0.13; cloth, net, 25 

INTERIOR OF JESUS AND MARY. Grou. 2 vols. net, 2 00 

INTRODUCTION TO A DEVOUT LIFE. St. Francis de Sales, net, 50 
LESSONS OF THE KING. 60 

LETTERS OF ST. ALPHONSUS DE LIGUORI. 4 vols., each vol., net, 1 50 

2 



LIGHT FOR NEW TIMES. Fletches. net 60 

LITTLE ALTAR BOYS' MANUAL. 25 

LITTLE BOOK OF SUPERIORS. net, 75 

LITTLE CHILD OF MARY. A Small Prayer-Book. 35 

LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY. Lasance. Illustrated. 25 

LITTLE MANUAL OF ST. JOSEPH. Lings. 25 

LITTLE MONTH OF MAY. McMahon. Flexible. net 25 

LITTLE MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY. net, 25 

LITTLE OFFICE OF THE IMMACULATE CONCEPTION. o 05 
LITLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. New cheap edition. 1 25 

LOVER OF SOULS. THE. Brinkmeyer. net, 1 00 

MANUAL OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST. Lasance. net, 75 

MANUAL OF THE HOLY FAMILY. net, 60 

MANUAL OF THE HOLY NAME. 50 

MANUAL OF THE SACRED HEART, NEW. 50 

MANUAL OF ST. ANTHONY, NEW. net, 50 
MANUAL OF THEOLOGY FOR THE LAITY. Geiermann. 

Paper, net, 0.20; cloth, net, 40 

MARIAE COROLLA. Poems. Hill. net, 1 25 

MARY THE OUEEN. 60 

MASS DEVOTIONS AND READINGS ON THE MASS. Lasance. net, 75 

MEDITATIONS FOR ALL DAYS OF YEAR. Hamon, S.S. 5 vols, net, 5 00 

MEDITATIONS FOR EVERY DAY. Baxter. net, 1 50 

MEDITATIONS FOR EVERY DAY. Vercruysse, S.J. 2 vols. net, 3 50 

MEDITATIONS FOR MONTHLY RETREATS. net, 1 25 

MEDITATIONS FOR USE OF SECULAR CLERGY. Chaignon. net, 4 50 
MEDITATIONS FOR THE USE OF SEMINARIANS AND 

PRIESTS. Vol. I. Branchereau. net, 1 00 

MEDITATIONS FOR RETREATS. St. Francis de Sales. net, 75 
MEDITATIONS ON THE LIFE, THE TEACHINGS, AND THE 

PASSION OF TESUS CHRIST. Ilg-Clarke. 2 vols. net, 3 50 

MEDITATIONS ON THE MONTH OF OUR LADY. net, 75 

MEDITATIONS ON THE PASSION OF OUR LORD. 50 

METHOD OF CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE, SPIRAGO'S. Messmer. net, 1 50 

MIRACLES OF OUR LORD. 60 

MISCELLANY. LicroRi. net, 1 50 

MISSION BOOK FOR THE MARRIED. Girardey, C.SS.R. 50 

MISSION BOOK FOR THE SINGLE. Girardey, C.SS.R. 50 

MISSION BOOK OF REDEMPTORIST FATHERS. Liguori. 50 

MOMENTS BEFORE THE TABERNACLE. Russell, S.J. net, 50 

MONTH. NEW, OF THE HOLY ANGELS. St. Francis de Sales, net, 25 

MONTH OF MAY. Debussi, S.T. net, 50 
MONTH OF THE SOULS IN PURGATORY, The Little "Golden 

Sands." net, 25 

MORAL BRIEFS. Stapleton. net, 1 25 

MORES CATHOLICI; or, Ages of Faith. Digby. 4 vols. 25 00 

(Easy pavment plan, $1.00 down; $2.00 a month.) 

MOST HOLY ROSARY. Cramer, D.D. net, 50 

MY FIRST COMMUNION, the Happiest Day of My Life. Brennan. net, 75 

MY LITTLE PRAYER-BOOK. Illustrated. 12 

NEW MONTH OF THE HOLY ANGELS. net, 25 

NEW SUNDAY-SCHOOL COMPANION. ' 25 
NEW TESTAMENT. Cheap Edition. 

32mo, flexible cloth, net, 15 
NEW TESTAMENT. Illustrated Edition. 

16mo, printed in two colors, with 100 full-page illustrations, net, 60 
NEW TESTAMENT. India Paper Edition. 

American Seal, limp, round corners, gilt edges, net, 90 
NEW TESTAMENT. Large Print Edition. 

12mo, large, net, 75 

NEW TESTAMENT STUDIES. Conaty, D.D. 60 

OFF TO TERUSALEM. Benziger. net, 1 00 

OFFICE, COMPLETE, OF HOLY WEEK. 45 

Cheap Edition, cloth, cut flush, 20 

OUR FAVORITE DEVOTIONS. Lings. net, 75 

OUR FAVORITE NOVENAS. Lings. net, 75 

OUR MONTHLY DEVOTIONS. Lings. net, 1 25 

OUR OWN WILL. Allen. D.D. net, 75 

PARADISE ON EARTH OPENED TO ALL. Natale, S.J. net, 50 

3 



PARISH PRIEST ON DUTY, THE. Heuser. nei, 60 

PASSION, A FEW SIMPLE AND BUSINESS-LIKE WAYS OF 

DEVOTION TO THE. Hill, CP. 25 

PASSION AND DEATH OF JESUS CHRIST. Liguori. net, 1 50 

PASSION FLOWERS. Poems. Hill. net, 1 25 

PASSION, THOUGHTS AND AFFECTIONS ON, FOR EVERY 

DAY OF THE YEAR. Bergamo. net, 2 00 

PEARLS FROM FABER. Brunowe. net, 50 

PEARLS OF PRAYER. 35 

PERFECT RELIGIOUS, THE. De la Motte. net, 1 00 

PIOUS PREPARATION FOR FIRST HOLY COMMUNION. 

Lasance. Cloth, net, 75 

POCKET MANUAL. A Vest-Pocket Prayer-Book in very large type. 25 
POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON MARRIAGE. Girardey, C.SS.R. 

Paper, net, 0.13; cloth, net, 25 

POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS ON PRAYER. Girardey, C.SS.R. 

Paper, net, 0.13; cloth, net, 25 

POPULAR INSTRUCTIONS TO PARENTS. Girardey, C.SS.R. 

Paper, net, 0.13; cloth, net, 25 

PRAYER-BOOK FOR RELIGIOUS. Lasance. net, 1 50 

PREACHING. Vol. XV. Liguori. net, 1 50 

PREPARATION FOR DEATH. Liguori. net, 1 50 

QUEEN'S FESTIVALS. 60 

RELIGION OF SOCIALISM, THE CHARACTERISTICS AND. 

Ming, S.J. net, 1 50 

RELIGIOUS STATE, THE. Liguori. net, 50 

ROSARY, THE CROWN OF MARY. By a Dominican Father, 10 

ROSARY, THE. Scenes and Thoughts. Garesche, S.J. net, 50 

ROSARY, THE MOST HOLY. Meditations. Cramer. net, 50 

SACRAMENTALS. Lambing, D.D. Paper, net, 0.15; cloth, net, 35 

SACRAMENTALS — Prayer, etc. Muller, C.SS.R. net, 1 00 

SACRED HEART BOOK. THE. Lasance. net, 75 

SACRED HEART, DEVOTION TO, FOR FIRST FRIDAY OF 

EVERY MONTH. By Pere Huguet. net, 40 

SACRED HEART, NEW MANUAL OF. 50 

SACRIFICE OF MASS WORTHILY CELEBRATED. Chaignon, S.J. 

net, 1 50 

ST. ANTHONY. Keller. net, 75 

ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI. Social Reformer. Dubois, S.M. net, 1 00 
SECRET OF SANCTITY. St. Francis de Sales. net, 1 00 

SERAPHIC GUIDE, THE. A Manual for the Members of the 

Third Order of St. Francis. By a Franciscan Father. 60 

SHORT CONFERENCES ON THE LITTLE OFFICE OF THE IM- 
MACULATE CONCEPTION. Rainer. net, 50 
SHORT STORIES ON CHRISTIAN DOCTRINE. From the French by 

McMahon. net, 1 00 

SHORT VISITS TO THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Lasance. 25 

SICK CALLS. Mulligan. net, 1 00 

SOCIALISM AND CHRISTIANITY. Stang, D.D. net, 1 00 

SOCIALISM. Cathrein, S.T. net, 1 50 

SODALIST'S VADE MECUM. • 50 

SPIRIT OF SACRIFICE, THE. Giraud. net, 2 00 

SPIRITUAL DESPONDENCY AND TEMPTATIONS. Michel, S.J. 

net, 1 25 

SPIRITUAL EXERCISES FOR TEN DAYS' RETREAT. Smetana. net, 1 00 
SPIRITUAL PEPPER AND SALT. Stang. Paper, net, 0.20; cloth, net, 0.40 
ST. ANTHONY. Keller. net, 75 

ST. FRANCIS OF ASSISI, Social Reformer. Dubois, S.M. net, 1 50 

STORY OF THE FRIENDS OF JESUS. 60 

STORIES FOR FIRST COMMUNICANTS. Keller, D.D. 50 

STRIVING AFTER PERFECTION. Bayma, S.T. net, 1 00 

SUNDAY SCHOOL TEACHER'S GUIDE TO SUCCESS. net, 75 

SURE WAY TO A HAPPY MARRIAGE. Taylor. Paper, net, 

0.13; cloth, net, 25 

TALKS WITH LITTLE ONES ABOUT APOSTLES' CREED. 60 

THOUGHTS ON THE RELIGIOUS LIFE. Lasance. net, 1 50 

TRUE POLITENESS. Demore. net, 75 

TRUE SPOUSE OF JESUS CHRIST. Liguori. 2 vols. net, 3 00 

The same, one-volume edition, net, 1 25 



VENERATION OF THE BLESSED VIRGIN. Rohner, O.S.B. net, 1 25 



VEST-POCKET GEMS OF DEVOTION. 20 

VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS. Liguori. net, 1 50 

VISITS, SHORT, TO BLESSED SACRAMENT. Lasance. 25 
VISITS TO JESUS IN THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Lasance. net, 50 

VISITS TO JESUS IN THE TABERNACLE. Lasance. net, 1 25 
VISITS TO THE MOST HOLY SACRAMENT and to the Blessed Virgin 

Mary. Liguori. net, 50 

VOCATIONS EXPLAINED. 10 

WAY OF INTERIOR PEACE. De Lehen, S.J. net, 1 50 

WAY OF SALVATION AND PERFECTION. Liguori. net, 1 50 

WAY OF THE CROSS. Paper, 05 

WAY OF THE CROSS. By a Jesuit Father. net, 15 
WAY OF THE CROSS. According to Method of St. Francis 

Assisi. net, 15 

WAY OF THE CROSS. According to Eucharistic Method. net, 15 
WAY OF THE CROSS. According to Method of St. Alphonsus 

Liguori. net, 15 
WHAT THE CHURCH TEACHES. Drury. Paper, net, 0.20; 

cloth, net, 40 

JUVENILES. 

ADVENTURE WITH THE APACHES. Ferry. 45 

ARMORER OF SOLINGEN. Herchenbach. 45 

AS TRUE AS GOLD. Mannix. 45 

BELL FOUNDRY. THE. Von Schaching. 45 

BERKELEYS, THE. Wight. 45 
BEARNE, REV. DAVID, S.J. 

SHEER PLUCK. 85 

MELOR OF THE SILVER HAND. 85 

THE GUILD BOYS' PLAY AT RIDINGDALE. 85 

NEW BOYS AT RIDINGDALE. 85 

THE WITCH OF RIDINGDALE. 85 

RIDINGDALE FLOWER SHOW. 85 

CHARLIE CHITTYWICK. 85 

BISTOURI. By A. Melandri. 45 
BLACK LADY AND ROBIN RED BREAST. By Canon Schmid. 25 

BLISSYLVANIA POST-OFFICE. By Marion Ames Taggart. 45 

BOB O'LINK. Waggaman. 45 

BOYS IN THE BLOCK. By Maurice F. Egan. -25 

BUNT AND BILL. Clara Mulholland. 45 

BUZZER'S CHRISTMAS. By Mary T. Waggaman. 25 

BY BRANSCOMBE RIVER. By Marion Ames Taggart. 45 

CAKE AND THE EASTER EGGS. By Canon Schmid. 25 

CANARY BIRD. By Canon Schmid. 45 

CARROLL DARE. By Mary T. Waggaman. 1 25 

THE CHILDREN OF CUPA. Mannix. 45 

COLLEGE BOY, A. By Anthony Yorke. 85 
COPUS, REV. J. E., S.J.: 

HARRY RUSSELL. 85 

SHADOWS LIFTED. 85 

ST. CUTHBERT'S. 85 

TOM LOSELY: Boy. 85 

DADDY DAN. Waggaman. 45 

DAUGHTER OF KINGS, A. Hinkson. 1 25 

DIMPLING'S SUCCESS. By Clara Mulholland. 45 

DOLLAR HUNT. THE. Martin. 45 
DOUBLE KNOT AND OTHER STORIES, A. Waggaman and Others. 1 25 

EVERY-DAY GIRL, AN. By Mary C. Crowley. 45 

FATAL DIAMONDS. By E. C. Donnelly. 25 
FINN, REV. F. J., S.J. 

HIS FIRST AND LAST APPEARANCE. Illustrated. 1 00 

THE BEST FOOT FORWARD. 85 

THAT FOOTBALL GAME. 85 

ETHELRED PRESTON. 85 

CLAUDE LIGHTFOOT. 85 

HARRY DEE. 85 

TOM PLAYFAIR. 85 



6 



FINR REV. F. J., SJ. (Cont'd.) 

PERCY WYNN. 85 

MOSTLY BOYS. 85 

"BUT THY LOVE AND THY GRACE." 1 00 

MY STRANGE FRIEND. 25 

FIVE O'CLOCK STORIES; or, The Old Tales Told Again. 75 
FLOWER OF THE FLOCK, THE, and the Badgers of Belmont. Egan. 85 

FOR THE WHITE ROSE. Hinkson. 45 

FRED'S LITTLE DAUGHTER. Smith. 45 

GODFREY THE HERMIT. Schmid. 25 

GOLDEN LILY, THE. Hinkson. 45 

GREAT CAPTAIN, THE. Hinkson. 45 

HALDEMAN CHILDREN, THE. Mannix. 45 

HARMONY FLATS. Whitmire. 85 

HEIR OF DREAMS, AN. O'Malley. 45 

HOP BLOSSOMS. Schmid. 25 

HOSTAGE OF WAR, A. Bonesteel. 45 

HOW THEY WORKED THEIR WAY. Egan. 75 

INUNDATION, THE. Schmid. 45 

"JACK." Bv a Religious of The Society of The Holy Child Jesus. 45 

TACK HILDRETH AMONG THE INDIANS. 2 vols., each, 85 

JACK HILDRETH ON THE NILE. Taggart. Cloth, 85 

TACK O'LANTERN. Waggaman. 45 
TUVENILE ROUND TABLE. First, Second, Third Series. Each, 1 00 

KLONDIKE PICNIC. Donnelly. 85 

LAMP OF THE SANCTUARY. Wiseman. 25 
LEGENDS OF THE HOLY CHILD JESUS from Many Lands. Lutz. 75 

LITTLE MISSY. Waggaman. 45 

LOYAL BLUE AND ROYAL SCARLET. Taggart. 85 

MADCAP SET AT ST. ANNE'S. Brunowe. 45 

MARY TRACY'S FORTUNE. Sadlier. 45 

MASTER FRIDOLIN. Giehrl. 25 

MILLY AVELING. Smith. Cloth, 85 
MORE FIVE O'CLOCK STORIES. In Prose and Verse. By a Religious 

of The Society of The Holy Child Jesus. 75 

MYSTERIOUS DOORWAY. Sadlier. 45 

MYSTERY OF CLEVERLY. Barton. 85 

MYSTERY OF HORNBY HALL. Sadlier. 85 

MY STRANGE FRIEND. Finn. 25 

NAN NOBODY. Waggaman. 45 

OLD CHARLMONT'S SEED-BED. Smith. 45 

OLD ROBBER'S CASTLE. Schmid. . 25 

ONE AFTERNOON AND OTHER STORIES. Taggart. 1 25 

OUR BOYS' AND GIRLS' LIBRARY. 14 vols., each, 25 

OVERSEER OF MAHLBOURG. Schmid. 25 

PANCHO AND PANCHITA. Mannix. 45 

PAULINE ARCHER. Sadlier. 45 

PETRONILLA. Donnelly. 85 

PICKLE AND PEPPER. Dorsey. 85 

PILGRIM FROM IRELAND. Carnot. 45 

PLAYWATER PLOT, THE. Waggaman. 60 

OUEEN'S PAGE. Hinkson. 45 

RECRUIT TOMMY COLLINS. Bonesteel. 45 

ROSE BUSH. Schmid. 25 

ROUND THE WORLD. Vols. I, II, III, IV. Each, 85 

SEA-GULL'S ROCK. Sandeau. 45 

SHADOWS LIFTED. Copus, SJ. 85 
SPALDING. REV. H., S.J.: 

THE MARKS OF THE BEAR CLAWS. 85 

CAVE BY THE BEECH FORK. 85 

THE SHERIFF OF THE BEECH FORK. 85 

THE RACE FOR COPPER ISLAND. 85 

STRONG-ARM OF AVALON. Yn'aggaman. 85 

SUMMER AT WOODVILLE. Sadlier. 45 

TALES AND LEGENDS OF THE MIDDLE AGES. De Capella. 75 

TALISMAN, THE. Sadlier. 60 

TAMING OF POLLY. Dorsey. 85 

THREE GIRLS AND ESPECIALLY ONE. Taggart. 45 

THREE LITTLE KINGS. Giehrl. 25 



e 



TOM'S LUCKPOT. Waggaman. 45 

TOORALLADY. Walsh. 45 

TRANSPLANTING OF TESSIE. Waggaman. GO 

TREASURE OF NUGGET MOUNTAIN. Taggart. 85 

TWO LITTLE GIRLS. Mack. 45 

VIOLIN MAKER, THE. Smith. 45 
WAGER OF GERALD O'ROURKE, THE. Finn-Thiele. net, 35 

WAYWARD WINIFRED. Sadlier. 85 
WHERE THE ROAD LED AND OTHER STORIES. Sadlier and 

others. 1 25 

WINNETOU, THE APACHE KNIGHT. Taggart. 85 

WRONGFULLY ACCUSED. Herchenbach. 45 

YOUNG COLOR GUARD, THE. Bonesteel. 45 

NOVELS AND STORIES. 

"BUT THY LOVE AND THY GRACE." Finn, S.J. 1 00 

CARROLL DARE. Waggaman. 1 25 

CIRCUS RIDER'S DAUGHTER, THE. Brackel. 1 25 

CONNOR D'ARCY'S STRUGGLES. Bertholds. 1 25 

CORINNE'S VOW. Waggaman. 1 25 

DION AND THE SIBYLS. Keon. 1 25 

FABIOLA. Wiseman. Illustrated. 90 

FABIOLA'S SISTER. Clarke. 1 25 

FATAL BEACON, THE. Brackel. 1 25 

HEARTS OF GOLD. Edhor. 1 25 

HEIRESS OF CRONENSTEIN, THE. Countess Hahn-Hahn. 1 25 

HER BLIND FOLLY. Holt. 1 25 
HER FATHER'S DAUGHTER. Hinkson. net, 1 25 

IDOLS; or, The Secrets of the Rue Chaussee d'Antin. De Navery. 1 25 
IN THE DAYS OF KING HAL. Taggart. net, 1 25 

IN GOD'S GOOD TIME. Ross. 1 25 

"KIND HEARTS AND CORONETS." Harrison. 1 25 

LET NO MAN PUT ASUNDER. Marie. 1 00 

LINKED LIVES. Douglas. 1 50 

MARCELLA GRACE. Mulholland. Illustrated Edition. 1 25 
MIRROR OF SHALOTT. Benson. net, 1 25 

MISS ERIN. Francis. 1 25 

MONK'S PARDON. THE. De Navery. 1 25 

MR. BILLY BUTTONS. Lecky. 1 25 

"NOT A JUDGMENT." Keon. 1 25 

OTHER MISS LISLE, THE. Martin. 1 25 

OUT OF BONDAGE. Holt. 1 25 

OUTLAW OF CAMARGUE, THE. Lamothe. 1 25 

PASSING SHADOWS. Yorke. 1 25 

PERE MONNIER'S WARD. Lecky. 1 25 

PILKINGTON HEIR, THE. Sadlier. 1 25 

PRODIGAL'S DAUGHTER, THE. By Lelia Hardin Bugg. 1 00 
RED INN OF ST. LYPHAR, THE. A Romance of La Vendee. Sadlier. 1 25 

ROMANCE OF A PLAYWRIGHT. By Vte. Henri de Bornier. 1 00 

ROSE OF THE WORLD. Martin. 1 25 
ROUND TABLE OF AMERICAN CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. 

Complete Stories, with Biographies, Portraits, etc. 1 50 
ROUND TABLE OF FRENCH CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. 

Complete Stories, with Biographies, Portraits, etc. 1 50 
ROUND TABLE OF GERMAN CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. Illustrated. 1 50 
ROUND TABLE OF IRISH AND ENGLISH CATHOLIC NOVELISTS. 

Complete Stories, Biographies, Portraits, etc. Cloth, 1 50 
RULER OF THE KINGDOM, THE, and other Phases of Life 

and Character. Keon. 1 25 

SECRET OF THE GREEN VASE. Cooke. 1 25 

SENIOR LIEUTENANT'S WAGER. 1 25 

SOGGARTH AROON. Guinan, C.C. 1 25 

THAT MAN'S DAUGHTER. Ross. 1 25 

TRAIL OF THE DRAGON. 1 25 

TRAINING OF SILAS, THE. Devine, S.J. 1 25 

TRUE STORY OF MASTER GERARD, THE. Sadlier. 1 25 

UNRAVELING OF A TANGLE, THE. Taggart. 1 25 

VOCATION OF EDWARD CONWAY. Egan. 1 25 



7 



WAY THAT LED BEYOND. By J. Harrison. 1 25 

WHEN LOVE IS STRONG. Keon. 1 25 

WOMAN OF FORTUNE, A. By Christian Reid. 1 25 

WORLD WELL LOST. By Esther Robertson. 75 

LIVES AND HISTORIES. 

AUTOBIOGRAPHY OF ST. IGNATIUS LOYOLA. Edited by 

O'Conor, SJ. net, 1 25 

ANGLICAN ORDINATIONS. Semple, S.J. net, 35 

BEGINNINGS OF CHRISTIANITY. Shahan. net, 2 00 

CHURCH HISTORY. Businger. 75 

GOLDEN BELLS IN CONVENT TOWERS. net, 1 00 

HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Bruece. 2 vols., net, 3 00 

HISTORY OF THE CATHOLIC CHURCH. Shea. net, 1 50 

HISTORY OF THE PROTESTANT REFORMATION. Cobbett. net, 75 

LIFE OF BLESSED VIRGIN. Illustrated. Rohner. net, 1 25 

LIFE OF CHRIST. Illustrated. Cochem. net, 1 25 

LIFE OF POPE PIUS X. 2 00 

LIFE OF MOST REV. JOHN HUGHES. Brann. net, 75 
LIFE OF OUR LORD AND SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST AND 

OF HIS VIRGIN MOTHER MARY. Brennan. 4to. net, 10 00 
(Easy pavment plan, $1.00 down, $1.00 a month.) 

LIFE OF SISTER ANNE KATHERINE EMMERICH. Wegener, O.S.A. 

LIFE OF VEN. MARY CRESCENTIA HOESS. Degman, O.S.F. net, 1 25 
LITTLE LIVES OF SAINTS FOR CHILDREN. Berthold. 111. 

Cloth, 60 

LITTLE PICTORIAL LIVES OF SAINTS. New, cheap edition. 1 25 

LOURDES. Clarke, S.J. 1 00 

MIDDLE AGES, THE. Shahan. net, 2 00 

PATRON SAINTS FOR CATHOLIC YOUTH. 3 vols. Each, 60 

PICTORIAL LIVES OF THE SAINTS. net, 2 00 
ST. ANTHONY, THE SAINT OF THE WHOLE WORLD. 

Ward. Cloth. net, 75 

STORY OF TESUS. Illustrated. net, 60 

STORY OF THE DIVINE CHILD. Lings. 60 

VICTORIES OF THE MARTYRS. Liguori. net, 1 50 

THEOLOGY, LITURGY, SERMONS. SCIENCE, AND 
PHILOSOPHY. 

ANGLICAN ORDINATIONS. Semple, S.J. 35 

BENEDICENDA. Schulte. net, 1 50 

BREVE COMPENDIUM THEOLOGIAE. Berthier. net, 2 50 

BUSINESS GUIDE FOR PRIESTS. Stang. net, 1 00 

CANONICAL PROCEDURE. Doste. net, 1 50 

CHRISTIAN APOLOGETICS. Devivier. net, 2 00 

CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY: God. Driscoll. net, 1 50 

CHRIST IN TYPE AND PROPHECY. Maas, S.J. 2 vols., net, 4 00 
CHURCH TREASURER'S PEW COLLECTION AND RECEIPT 

BOOK. net, 1 00 

COMPENDIUM JURIS CANONICI. Smith. net, 2 00 

COMPENDIUM JURIS REGULARIUM. Bachofen. net, 2 50 

COMPENDIUM SACRAE LITURGIAE. Wapelhorst. net, 2 50 

CONSECRANDA. Schulte. net, 1 50 

DATA OF MODERN ETHICS EXAMINED. Ming, S.J. 2 00 
DIARY, ORDO AND NOTE-BOOK. Cloth, net, 1.00; flexible 

leather, net, 1 50 
ELEMENTS OF ECCLESIASTICAL LAW. Smith, D.D. 3 vols., 

each, net, 2 50 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF HOLY 

SCRIPTURES. Gigot, S.S. net, 2 50 
GENERAL INTRODUCTION TO THE STUDY OF HOLY 

SCRIPTURES. Abridged Edition. Gigot, S.S. net, 1 50 

GOD KNOWABLE AND KNOWN. Ronayne, S.J. net, 1 50 

GOOD CHRISTIAN, THE. Allen, D.D. 2 vols. net, 5 00 

8 



HISTORY OF THE MASS AND ITS CEREMONIES IN THE 

EASTERN AND WESTERN CHURCH. O'Brien. net, 1 25 

HUNOLT'S SERMONS. 12 vols., net, 25 00 

INTRODUCTION TO STUDY OF OLD TESTAMENT. Vol. I 

and II. Gigot. Each, net, 1 50 

JESUS LIVING IN THE PRIEST. Millet-Byrne. net, 2 00 

LIBER STATUS ANIMARUM; or Parish Census Book. Pocket 

Edition, net, 0.25; Large Edition, half-leather, net, 3 00 

MARRIAGE PROCESS IN THE UNITED STATES. Smith. net, 2 50 
MANUAL OF THEOLOGY FOR THE LAITY. Geiermann. 

Paper, net, 0.20; cloth, net, 40 

MEDULLA FUNDAMENTALIS THEOLOGIAE MORALIS. Stang. 

net, 1 00 

MORAL PRINCIPLES AND MEDICAL PRACTICE. Coppens, 

S.J. net, 1 00 

NATURAL LAW AND LEGAL PRACTICE. Holaind, S.J. net, 2 00 

OUTLINES OF DOGMATIC THEOLOGY. Hunter, S.J. 3 vols., net, 1 50 
OUTLINES OF NEW TESTAMENT HISTORY. Gigot. Cloth. net, 1 50 
OUTLINES OF SERMONS. Schuen. net, 2 00 

PASTORAL THEOLOGY. Stang, D.D. net, 1 50 

PHILOSOPHIA MORALI, DE. Russo. net, 2 00 

POLITICAL AND MORAL ESSAYS. Rickaby, S.J. net, 1 50 

PRAXIS SYNODALIS. net, 75 

PRIEST IN THE PULPIT. Schuech-Luebbermann. net, 1 50 

REGISTRUM BAPTISMORUM. net, 3 50 

REGISTRUM MATRIMONIORUM. net, 3 00 

RELATION OF EXPERIMENTAL PSYCHOLOGY TO PHI- 
LOSOPHY, de Mercier. net, 35 
RIGHTS OF OUR LITTLE ONES. Conway, S.J. Paper, 10 
RITUALE COMPENDIOSUM. net, 90 
SANCTUARY BOYS' ILLUSTRATED MANUAL. McCallen, S.S. net, 50 
SERMONS, ABRIDGED, FOR SUNDAYS. Liguori. net, 1 25 
SERMONS FOR CHILDREN OF MARY. Callerio. net, 1 50 
SERMONS FOR CHILDREN'S MASSES. Frassinetti-Lings. net, 1 50 
SERMONS FOR THE SUNDAYS AND CHIEF FESTIVALS OF 

THE ECCLESIASTICAL YEAR. Pottgeisser, S.J. 2 vols. net, 2 50 
SERMONS FROM THE LATINS. Baxter. net, 2 00 

SERMONS ON DEVOTION TO THE SACRED HEART. 

Bierbaum. net, 75 

SERMONS ON THE BLESSED SACRAMENT. Scheuer- 

Lasance. net, 1 50 

SERMONS ON THE ROSARY. Frings. net, 1 00 

SHORT SERMONS FOR LOW MASSES. Schouppe, S.J. net, 1 25 

THEORY AND PRACTICE OF THE CONFESSIONAL. Shieler. 3 50 
VADE MECUM SACERDOTUM. Cloth, net, 0.25; Morocco, net, 50 

MISCELLANEOUS. 

ACROSS WIDEST AMERICA. Devine, S.J. net, 1 50 

BENZIGER'S MAGAZINE. The Popular Catholic Family Magazine. 

Subscription per year, 2 00 

BONE RULES; or, Skeleton of English Grammar. Tabb. 50 

CATHOLIC HOME ANNUAL. Stories by Best Writers. 25 

CORRECT THING FOR CATHOLICS. Bugg. net, 75 

ELOCUTION CLASS. O'Grady. net, 50 

GENTLEMAN, A. Egan. net, 75 

HOW TO GET ON. Feeney. net, 1 00 

HYMN-BOOK. 35 

LADY, A. Manners and Usages. Bugg. net, 75 

LITTLE FOLKS' ANNUAL. 10 

READINGS AND RECITATIONS FOR JUNIORS. O'Grady. net, 50 

RECORD OF BAPTISMS. 14x10 inches, 3 styles. 3.00, 4.00, 6 00 

RECORD OF MARRIAGES. 14x10 inches. 3 stvles. 3.00, 4.00, 6 00 

SELECT RECITATIONS FOR CATHOLIC SCHOOLS AND 

ACADEMIES. O'Grady. 1 00 

SONGS AND SONNETS. Egan. 1 00 

SURSUM CORDA. Hymns. Paper, 0.15; cloth, 25 



SURSUM CORDA. With English and German Text. 45 

VISIT TO EUROPE AND THE HOLY LAND. Fairbanks. 1 50 

WHAT CATHOLICS HAVE DONE FOR SCIENCE. Brexnan. net, 1 25 
PRAYER BOOKS. 

Benziger Brothers publish the most complete line of prayer-books in this 
country, _ embracing Prayer-books for Children; Prayer-books for First 
Communicants; Prayer-books for Special Devotions; Prayer-books for 
General Use. Catalogue will be sent free on application. 
SCHOOL-BOOKS. 

Benziger Brothers' school text-books are considered to be the finest pub- 
lished. They embrace New Century Catholic Readers (Illustrations in 
Colors); Catholic National Readers; Catechisms; History; Grammars; 
Spellers; Elocution; Charts. 



A HOME LIBRARY FOR $1 DOWN. 



Original American Stories for the Young, by the 
Very Best Catholic Authors. 

OA COPYRIGHTED BOOKS and a YEAR'S SUBSCRIPTION to 
BENZIGER' S MAGAZINE (in itself a library of good reading.) 

Regular Price of Books, . . $H-7o [Regular Price, 
Regular Price of Benziger's Magazine, 2.00 ) $13. 70 



Special Net Price, $10.00 #1.00 Down. $1.00 a Month. 

You get the books at once, and have the use of them, while making easy pay- 
ments. Send us only $1.00, and we will forward the books at once. $1.00 
entitles you to immediate possession. No further payment need be made for 
a month. Afterward you pay $1.00 a month. 

THIS IS THE EASY WAY TO GET A LIBRARY. 

And remember these are the Best Boohs that can be placed in the hands of 
Catholic Youth AT ANY PRICE. 



ANOTHER EASY WAY OF GETTING BOOKS. 

Each year we publish four New Novels by the best Catholic authors. 
These novels are interesting beyond the ordinary: not strictly religious, but 
Catholic in tone and feeling. 

We ask you to give us a Standing Order for these novels. The price is 
$1.25 a volume postpaid. The $5.00 is not to be paid at one time, but $1.25 
each time a volume is published. 

As a Special Inducement for giving us a standing order for these novels, 
we will give you free a subscription to Benziger's Magazine. This Magazine- 
is recognized as the best and handsomest Catholic magazine published. The 
regular price of the Magazine is $2.00 a year. 

Thus for $5.00 a year — paid $1.25 at a time — you will get four good 
books and receive in addition free a year's subscription to Benziger's Maga- 
zine. The Magazine will be continued 'from year to year, as long as the stand- 
ing order for the novels is in force, which will be till countermanded. 

Send $1.25 for the first novel and get your name placed on the sub- 
scription list of Benziger's Magazine. 

10 



THE BEST STORIES AND ARTICLES 



1000 Illustrations a Year 

bemzioer's immzmt 

The Popular Catholic Family Monthly 
RECOMMENDED BY 70 ARCHBISHOPS AND BISHOPS 
Subscription, $2.00 a Year 



What Benziger's Magazine Gives its Readers : 

Three complete novels of absorbing - interest — equal to three 
books selling* at $1.25 each. 

Fitty complete stories by the best writers — equal to a book 
of 300 pages selling" at $1.25. 

One thousand beautiful illustrations. 

Forty large reproductions of celebrated paintings. 

Twenty articles — equal to a book of 150 pages — on travel 
and adventure ; on the manners, customs and home- 
life of peoples ; on the haunts and habits of animals. 

Twenty articles — equal to a book of 150 pages — on historic 
events, times, places, important industries. 

Twenty articles — equal to a book of 150 pages — on the 
fine arts ; celebrated artists and their painting's, sculp- 
ture, music, etc., and nature studies. 

Twelve pages of games and amusements for in-doors and 
out-of-doors. 

Seventy-two pages of fashions, fads, and fancies, gathered 
at home and abroad, helpful hints for home workers, 
household column, cooking recipes, etc. 

Current Events," the important happenings over the 
whole world, described with pen and pictures. 

Twelve prize competitions, with valuable prizes. 



Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 
Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 
Treatment Date: Dec. 2004 

PreservationTechnologies 

A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATION 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



OCT 2 1909 



ifUimliilifliiitm 



